COPDPhase 4EMERALNCT02473237
Efficacy in Walked Distance of Indacaterol vs Tiotropium in Women With COPD Secondary to Biomass (EMERALD)
A Phase 4 study testing indacaterol and Tiotropium in people with COPD, run by National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, Mexico at 1 site in Mexico.
Trial summary
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) secondary to biomass exposure constitutes a chronic respiratory condition frequently excluded from large clinical trials. Biomass exposure COPD have some histopathologic, clinical, radiological and functional differences with tobacco smoke COPD. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- COPD
- What is being tested?
- indacaterol and Tiotropium
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 1 siteMexico
- Study dates
- Apr 2013to Aug 2015
- 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 50 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Mexican patients at the COPD outpatient clinic
- Age: >50
- Female (female eligibility criteria are: Women in no fertile age who are non pregnant and committed to use effective contraception).
- FEV1 less than 80% of predicted and risk of exacerbation (GOLD update 2011) B, C or D
- Women with COPD diagnostic with biomass exposition (defined with an Hours/years index >200 hr/y).
- Be Able to assist at the different visits during the study.
Show all 11Show fewer
- Be Able to performed the spirometry
- Patients without contraindications to perform the six-minute walk test.
- Informed consent signed.
- No history of exacerbations in the last 6 weeks previous to the inclusion.
- With amenorrhea history more than a year duration.
Who cannot join
- Pregnant or breastfeeding women
- Use of Methotrexate, gold salts, troleandomycin, cyclosporine, immunosuppressants,
- History of uncontrolled renal disease, liver disease, uncontrolled cardiovascular disease, metabolic disease, neurologic disease, hematologic disease, oncologic disease, or autoimmune disease.
- Any alteration in normal values of the following Laboratory test: liver test, PIE, Biochemistry tests.
- History of asthma, bronchiectases, tuberculosis, recent respiratory tract infection, were hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation (6 weeks prior to visit 1), any significant pulmonary disease o cardiovascular abnormality
- Patients that is under suspicion of having cancer.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Mexico1 site
Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias, "Ismael Cosío Villegas"
Mexico City, Mexico City, 14080
About this study
Official title: Efficacy and Acute Effects on Walked Distance froM basEline and Post Dose of indacateRol vs Tiotropium in Women With modeRAte to Severe COPD Secondary to Biomass Exposure: Open Label Crossover Clinical Trial
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) secondary to biomass exposure constitutes a chronic respiratory condition frequently excluded from large clinical trials. Biomass exposure COPD have some histopathologic, clinical, radiological and functional differences with tobacco smoke COPD. However, until now, there are no evidence in this patients about the clinical response to bronchodilators routinely used in tobacco smoke COPD.
Primary objective: To compare changes in walked meters from baseline on six minute walking test (6MWT) to 23:45 hours after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Read more
Secondary objectives: To compare changes in pulmonary function (inspiratory capacity, Forced Expiratory Volume in first second (FEV1) milliliters, FEV1 "through") from baseline (-10 minutes) to 23:45 hours after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
This will be an open label study, double blinded, cross over and conducted at specialized respiratory care center (National Institute of Respiratory Diseases), to compare the acute effects of ultra long acting bronchodilators used in tobacco smoke exposure COPD. Unicentric study.
Ethics Committee approbation: C 22-12
Read the detailed description
Background: Until now, COPD secondary to biomass exposure is treated in similar way that COPD due to tobacco smoke. Unfortunately none of the clinical trial included patient with biomass exposure in their multicenter studies. COPD due to biomass exposure is very common in Mexico and in other sub-developed countries, and represent a high economy burden similar as the tobacco exposure. In Mexico, in a reference center of COPD (National Institute of Respiratory Disease) thirty percent of women who attended with COPD has only the antecedent to cook with biomass. These patients have a predominant airway component, rather than emphysema. These patients have chronic bronchitis as a main clinical picture and in consequence, more exacerbations. Additionally, they present more symptoms such as dyspnea, and as COPD secondary to tobacco exposure, the functional and inspiratory capacity are reduced. There are previous studies that described the acute effects of long acting bronchodilators like salmeterol on functional and inspiratory capacity. However, they were done in patients with COPD secondary to tobacco smoke and there are not studies done in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposition. Indacaterol a novel long-acting bronchodilator provide 24 h bronchodilation on once-daily dosing with a fast onset of action. Assuming the conditions of patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure (women, rural or suburban origin, etc.) it is necessary strategies that enhance the adherence. There is information about better adherence with the least frequency of a drug. Tiotropium provide 24 h bronchodilation on once-daily dosing with a slow onset of action, it was selected because it is widely used in the treatment of COPD and is the only drug of the therapeutic class (long acting antimuscarinic bronchodilator) available in the market.
Until now there is no international nor national reported experience with any bronchodilators in COPD secondary to biomass.
This will be the first clinical trial in the world that attempts to evaluate the acute effects (fast onset action) of those two long acting bronchodilators, in women with COPD secondary to biomass exposure. Besides, the results will help to highlight the need in the rest of the world to include these patients in the different multicenter studies.
Primary objective:
To compare changes in walked meters from baseline six minute walking test (6MWT) to 23:45 hours after one dose of Indacaterol (150µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Secondary efficacy Objectives are:
- To compare changes in Inspiratory Capacity (IC) from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 minutes and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with with biomass smoke COPD.
- To compare changes in FEV1 from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 min and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with biomass smoke COPD.
- To compare the 'trough' FEV1 (mean of values at 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose) after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
- To compare changes in dyspnea perception by using the Borg scale from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 min and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18 µg) in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
- To compare the frequency of adverse events presented during the study, between indacaterol vs tiotropium arm.
Methodology:
This will be an open label study conducted at specialized respiratory care center (National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, Mexico) to compare the 24 hours response to two long acting bronchodilators (Indacaterol vs Tiotropium), after one inhaled dose.
The primary endpoint will be changes in walked meters (6MWT) from baseline to 30, 60, 120 and 240 minutes post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
The key secondary endpoint will be the 'trough' FEV1 in milliliters (mean of values at 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min) post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18 µg) in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
The "trough" FEV1 value which was based on the mean of two measurements taken 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min following the previous day's morning dose.
Other secondary endpoints will be:
- FEV1 (in milliliters) and Inspiratory Capacity (IC in milliliters) will be measured frpm baseline (-10 min) to 30, 60, 90, 120 and 240 minutes post bronchodilators.
- Dyspnea perception will be measured by the 10 points Borg scale, from baseline to 30, 60, 120 and 240 minutes post bronchodilators.
In all patients spirometry will be performed serially over 24 h postdose. The design implies a crossover treatment in order to avoid variability between subjects and guarantee the outcome measures.
There will be 40 intervention patients with 40 controls (crossover design). The study comprised a pre-screening visit, a 7-day screening period, and one day, 1-week treatment periods. At the baseline visit, eligible patients were randomized equally to one of two treatment sequences (A or B) to receive either indacaterol 150 µg once-daily or Tiotropium 18 µg once-daily, followed by the other bronchodilator (Tiotropium or Indacaterol) each of them via a single-dose dry powder inhaler (SDDPI). Each treatment period was separated by a washout period of 7 days.
Number of centers \& patients: 1 center with 40 patients, sequentially exposed to the two option treatment and will be their own control. It was decided making a self control design with crossover treatment in order to avoid variability between subjects and guarantee the outcome measures.
Sample size justification:
The sample size was calculated considering a power of 80% and a alpha value of 0.05 and two tails. Taking the minimal clinical significance value for 6 minutes walking test of 54 meters and standard deviation of 95 meters (BODE study). Because of the design of the study the investigators expected minimal patient withdrawn (less than 10%).
Population:
It is known that COPD secondary to biomass exposure patients commonly have a frequent exacerbation phenotype compared with patients with COPD secondary to tobacco smoke, and the investigators also expect that this phenotype would have the major benefit of the therapy. That´s why there will be included COPD patients in groups B, C or D, according to GOLD update 2011.
Pharmacovigilance requirements:
All the Adverse Events (AE) would be reported following the procedure for Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) Report. In order to guarantee the safety of the patient, any AE occurring after patients began with the treatment of indacaterol.
All the recurrence, complications or progression of the original AE must be reported as follow up of the original event, no matter when it was presented. This report should be submitted during the first 24 hours after the treating physician receive the notification. Any AE that is not considered to be related to the previous reported AE, should be informed as a new event.
All SAEs shall be collected and registered in Serious Adverse Event Report Form.
Outcome measurements:
Primary:
Walked meters on six minute walking test.
Secondary:
inspiratory capacity and post bronchodilator measures changes from basal measures .
- Changes from baseline in pulmonary function and inspiratory capacity.
- Changes from baseline in the total score of the Borg scale for dyspnea measure.
- Conditions
- COPD
- Being tested
- indacaterol, Tiotropium
- Keywords
- COPD, biomass
- Medical subject headings
- Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
indacaterolDrug
Also called Onbrize
Indacaterol, one inhales capsule, 150 mcgr, by dry powder dispositive
TiotropiumDrug
Also called Spiriva
Tiotropium 18 mcgr, one inhaled capsule, by dry powder inhaler handihaler
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| indacaterol | Experimental | Indacaterol 150 mcgr, one inhaled capsule, dose once time on visit one, with dry powder inhaler device. Receives: Drug: indacaterol |
| Tiotropium | Active comparator | Tiotropium 18 mcgr, 1 inhaled capsule, dose once time a Day, with dry powder inhaler device. Receives: Drug: Tiotropium |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
changes in walked meters on six minute walking test (6MWT) from baseline to 23:45 hours after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Measured: baseline, 30, 60, 240 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
Secondary outcomes (4)
changes in Inspiratory Capacity (IC) from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 minutes and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with with biomass smoke COPD.
Measured: baseline, 30, 60, 240 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
the 'trough' FEV1 (mean of values at 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose) after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Measured: 23:10 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
changes in dyspnea perception by using the Borg scale from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 min and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18 µg) in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Measured: baseline, 30, 60, 240 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
the frequency of adverse events presented during the study, between indacaterol vs tiotropium arm
non serious adverse events; serious adverse events.
Measured: 4 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Jun 2015 (estimated)
- Study startApr 2013
- Primary completionJun 2015
- Study completionAug 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (7)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for COPDStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Triple blind
- Who is masked
- Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, Mexico
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Alejandra Ramirez Venegas, National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, Mexico
- Investigators
- Alejandra Ramírez-Venegas, M.Cs., Principal investigator, Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias, "Ismael Cosío Villegas"
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02473237
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- C 22-12
- Acronym
- EMERAL
- Status last verified
- Oct 2015
- First submitted
- 22 May 2015
- Last updated
- 16 Oct 2015
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Perez-Padilla R, Regalado J, Vedal S, Pare P, Chapela R, Sansores R, Selman M. Exposure to biomass smoke and chronic airway disease in Mexican women. A case-control study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1996 Sep;154(3 Pt 1):701-6. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.154.3.8810608.
PubMed 8810608Bruce N, Perez-Padilla R, Albalak R. Indoor air pollution in developing countries: a major environmental and public health challenge. Bull World Health Organ. 2000;78(9):1078-92.
PubMed 11019457Torres-Duque C, Maldonado D, Perez-Padilla R, Ezzati M, Viegi G; Forum of International Respiratory Studies (FIRS) Task Force on Health Effects of Biomass Exposure. Biomass fuels and respiratory diseases: a review of the evidence. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2008 Jul 15;5(5):577-90. doi: 10.1513/pats.200707-100RP.
PubMed 18625750Regalado J, Perez-Padilla R, Sansores R, Paramo Ramirez JI, Brauer M, Pare P, Vedal S. The effect of biomass burning on respiratory symptoms and lung function in rural Mexican women. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006 Oct 15;174(8):901-5. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200503-479OC. Epub 2006 Jun 23.
PubMed 16799080Caballero A, Torres-Duque CA, Jaramillo C, Bolivar F, Sanabria F, Osorio P, Orduz C, Guevara DP, Maldonado D. Prevalence of COPD in five Colombian cities situated at low, medium, and high altitude (PREPOCOL study). Chest. 2008 Feb;133(2):343-9. doi: 10.1378/chest.07-1361. Epub 2007 Oct 20.
PubMed 17951621Ramirez-Venegas A, Sansores RH, Perez-Padilla R, Regalado J, Velazquez A, Sanchez C, Mayar ME. Survival of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease due to biomass smoke and tobacco. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006 Feb 15;173(4):393-7. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200504-568OC. Epub 2005 Dec 1.
PubMed 16322646Aaron SD, Vandemheen KL, Fergusson D, Maltais F, Bourbeau J, Goldstein R, Balter M, O'Donnell D, McIvor A, Sharma S, Bishop G, Anthony J, Cowie R, Field S, Hirsch A, Hernandez P, Rivington R, Road J, Hoffstein V, Hodder R, Marciniuk D, McCormack D, Fox G, Cox G, Prins HB, Ford G, Bleskie D, Doucette S, Mayers I, Chapman K, Zamel N, FitzGerald M; Canadian Thoracic Society/Canadian Respiratory Clinical Research Consortium. Tiotropium in combination with placebo, salmeterol, or fluticasone-salmeterol for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Apr 17;146(8):545-55. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-146-8-200704170-00152. Epub 2007 Feb 19.
PubMed 17310045
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 16 Oct 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy and Acute Effects on Walked Distance froM basEline and Post Dose of indacateRol vs Tiotropium in Women With modeRAte to Severe COPD Secondary to Biomass Exposure: Open Label Crossover Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02473237
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EMERAL / C 22-12
- Conditions
- COPD
- Keywords
- COPD, biomass
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, MexicoOther government
- Study start
- Apr 2013
- Primary completion
- Jun 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 16 Jun 2015 (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.
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) secondary to biomass exposure constitutes a chronic respiratory condition frequently excluded from large clinical trials. Biomass exposure COPD have some histopathologic, clinical, radiological and functional differences with tobacco smoke COPD. However, until now, there are no evidence in this patients about the clinical response to bronchodilators routinely used in tobacco smoke COPD.
Primary objective: To compare changes in walked meters from baseline on six minute walking test (6MWT) to 23:45 hours after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Secondary objectives: To compare changes in pulmonary function (inspiratory capacity, Forced Expiratory Volume in first second (FEV1) milliliters, FEV1 "through") from baseline (-10 minutes) to 23:45 hours after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
This will be an open label study, double blinded, cross over and conducted at specialized respiratory care center (National Institute of Respiratory Diseases), to compare the acute effects of ultra long acting bronchodilators used in tobacco smoke exposure COPD. Unicentric study.
Ethics Committee approbation: C 22-12
Detailed description
Background: Until now, COPD secondary to biomass exposure is treated in similar way that COPD due to tobacco smoke. Unfortunately none of the clinical trial included patient with biomass exposure in their multicenter studies. COPD due to biomass exposure is very common in Mexico and in other sub-developed countries, and represent a high economy burden similar as the tobacco exposure. In Mexico, in a reference center of COPD (National Institute of Respiratory Disease) thirty percent of women who attended with COPD has only the antecedent to cook with biomass. These patients have a predominant airway component, rather than emphysema. These patients have chronic bronchitis as a main clinical picture and in consequence, more exacerbations. Additionally, they present more symptoms such as dyspnea, and as COPD secondary to tobacco exposure, the functional and inspiratory capacity are reduced. There are previous studies that described the acute effects of long acting bronchodilators like salmeterol on functional and inspiratory capacity. However, they were done in patients with COPD secondary to tobacco smoke and there are not studies done in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposition. Indacaterol a novel long-acting bronchodilator provide 24 h bronchodilation on once-daily dosing with a fast onset of action. Assuming the conditions of patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure (women, rural or suburban origin, etc.) it is necessary strategies that enhance the adherence. There is information about better adherence with the least frequency of a drug. Tiotropium provide 24 h bronchodilation on once-daily dosing with a slow onset of action, it was selected because it is widely used in the treatment of COPD and is the only drug of the therapeutic class (long acting antimuscarinic bronchodilator) available in the market.
Until now there is no international nor national reported experience with any bronchodilators in COPD secondary to biomass.
This will be the first clinical trial in the world that attempts to evaluate the acute effects (fast onset action) of those two long acting bronchodilators, in women with COPD secondary to biomass exposure. Besides, the results will help to highlight the need in the rest of the world to include these patients in the different multicenter studies.
Primary objective:
To compare changes in walked meters from baseline six minute walking test (6MWT) to 23:45 hours after one dose of Indacaterol (150µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Secondary efficacy Objectives are:
- To compare changes in Inspiratory Capacity (IC) from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 minutes and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with with biomass smoke COPD.
- To compare changes in FEV1 from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 min and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with biomass smoke COPD.
- To compare the 'trough' FEV1 (mean of values at 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose) after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
- To compare changes in dyspnea perception by using the Borg scale from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 min and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18 µg) in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
- To compare the frequency of adverse events presented during the study, between indacaterol vs tiotropium arm.
Methodology:
This will be an open label study conducted at specialized respiratory care center (National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, Mexico) to compare the 24 hours response to two long acting bronchodilators (Indacaterol vs Tiotropium), after one inhaled dose.
The primary endpoint will be changes in walked meters (6MWT) from baseline to 30, 60, 120 and 240 minutes post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
The key secondary endpoint will be the 'trough' FEV1 in milliliters (mean of values at 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min) post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18 µg) in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
The "trough" FEV1 value which was based on the mean of two measurements taken 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min following the previous day's morning dose.
Other secondary endpoints will be:
- FEV1 (in milliliters) and Inspiratory Capacity (IC in milliliters) will be measured frpm baseline (-10 min) to 30, 60, 90, 120 and 240 minutes post bronchodilators.
- Dyspnea perception will be measured by the 10 points Borg scale, from baseline to 30, 60, 120 and 240 minutes post bronchodilators.
In all patients spirometry will be performed serially over 24 h postdose. The design implies a crossover treatment in order to avoid variability between subjects and guarantee the outcome measures.
There will be 40 intervention patients with 40 controls (crossover design). The study comprised a pre-screening visit, a 7-day screening period, and one day, 1-week treatment periods. At the baseline visit, eligible patients were randomized equally to one of two treatment sequences (A or B) to receive either indacaterol 150 µg once-daily or Tiotropium 18 µg once-daily, followed by the other bronchodilator (Tiotropium or Indacaterol) each of them via a single-dose dry powder inhaler (SDDPI). Each treatment period was separated by a washout period of 7 days.
Number of centers \& patients: 1 center with 40 patients, sequentially exposed to the two option treatment and will be their own control. It was decided making a self control design with crossover treatment in order to avoid variability between subjects and guarantee the outcome measures.
Sample size justification:
The sample size was calculated considering a power of 80% and a alpha value of 0.05 and two tails. Taking the minimal clinical significance value for 6 minutes walking test of 54 meters and standard deviation of 95 meters (BODE study). Because of the design of the study the investigators expected minimal patient withdrawn (less than 10%).
Population:
It is known that COPD secondary to biomass exposure patients commonly have a frequent exacerbation phenotype compared with patients with COPD secondary to tobacco smoke, and the investigators also expect that this phenotype would have the major benefit of the therapy. That´s why there will be included COPD patients in groups B, C or D, according to GOLD update 2011.
Pharmacovigilance requirements:
All the Adverse Events (AE) would be reported following the procedure for Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) Report. In order to guarantee the safety of the patient, any AE occurring after patients began with the treatment of indacaterol.
All the recurrence, complications or progression of the original AE must be reported as follow up of the original event, no matter when it was presented. This report should be submitted during the first 24 hours after the treating physician receive the notification. Any AE that is not considered to be related to the previous reported AE, should be informed as a new event.
All SAEs shall be collected and registered in Serious Adverse Event Report Form.
Outcome measurements:
Primary:
Walked meters on six minute walking test.
Secondary:
inspiratory capacity and post bronchodilator measures changes from basal measures .
- Changes from baseline in pulmonary function and inspiratory capacity.
- Changes from baseline in the total score of the Borg scale for dyspnea measure.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Triple blind (care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| indacaterol | Experimental | Drug: indacaterolIndacaterol 150 mcgr, one inhaled capsule, dose once time on visit one, with dry powder inhaler device. |
| Tiotropium | Active comparator | Drug: TiotropiumTiotropium 18 mcgr, 1 inhaled capsule, dose once time a Day, with dry powder inhaler device. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Mexican patients at the COPD outpatient clinic
- Age: >50
- Female (female eligibility criteria are: Women in no fertile age who are non pregnant and committed to use effective contraception).
- FEV1 less than 80% of predicted and risk of exacerbation (GOLD update 2011) B, C or D
- Women with COPD diagnostic with biomass exposition (defined with an Hours/years index >200 hr/y).
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Pregnant or breastfeeding women
- Use of Methotrexate, gold salts, troleandomycin, cyclosporine, immunosuppressants,
- History of uncontrolled renal disease, liver disease, uncontrolled cardiovascular disease, metabolic disease, neurologic disease, hematologic disease, oncologic disease, or autoimmune disease.
- Any alteration in normal values of the following Laboratory test: liver test, PIE, Biochemistry tests.
- History of asthma, bronchiectases, tuberculosis, recent respiratory tract infection, were hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation (6 weeks prior to visit 1), any significant pulmonary disease o cardiovascular abnormality
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 |
|---|---|---|
| indacaterolAlso: OnbrizeIndacaterol, one inhales capsule, 150 mcgr, by dry powder dispositive | Drug | indacaterol |
| TiotropiumAlso: SpirivaTiotropium 18 mcgr, one inhaled capsule, by dry powder inhaler handihaler | Drug | Tiotropium |
Primary outcome
changes in walked meters on six minute walking test (6MWT) from baseline to 23:45 hours after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Time frame: baseline, 30, 60, 240 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
4 secondary outcomes
changes in Inspiratory Capacity (IC) from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 minutes and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18µg) in patients with with biomass smoke COPD.
Time frame: baseline, 30, 60, 240 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
the 'trough' FEV1 (mean of values at 23 h 10 min and 23 h 45 min post-dose) after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Time frame: 23:10 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
changes in dyspnea perception by using the Borg scale from baseline (-10 minutes) to 30, 60, 240 min and 23:45 hours post dose of Indacaterol (150 µg) vs Tiotropium (18 µg) in patients with COPD secondary to biomass exposure.
Time frame: baseline, 30, 60, 240 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium
the frequency of adverse events presented during the study, between indacaterol vs tiotropium arm
Time frame: 4 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 16 Oct 2015.
- Results publication: PubMed 8810608Perez-Padilla R, Regalado J, Vedal S, Pare P, Chapela R, Sansores R, Selman M. Exposure to biomass smoke and chronic airway disease in Mexican women. A case-control study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1996 Sep;154(3 Pt 1):701-6. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.154.3.8810608.
- Results publication: PubMed 11019457Bruce N, Perez-Padilla R, Albalak R. Indoor air pollution in developing countries: a major environmental and public health challenge. Bull World Health Organ. 2000;78(9):1078-92.
- Results publication: PubMed 18625750Torres-Duque C, Maldonado D, Perez-Padilla R, Ezzati M, Viegi G; Forum of International Respiratory Studies (FIRS) Task Force on Health Effects of Biomass Exposure. Biomass fuels and respiratory diseases: a review of the evidence. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2008 Jul 15;5(5):577-90. doi: 10.1513/pats.200707-100RP.
- Results publication: PubMed 16799080Regalado J, Perez-Padilla R, Sansores R, Paramo Ramirez JI, Brauer M, Pare P, Vedal S. The effect of biomass burning on respiratory symptoms and lung function in rural Mexican women. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006 Oct 15;174(8):901-5. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200503-479OC. Epub 2006 Jun 23.
- Results publication: PubMed 17951621Caballero A, Torres-Duque CA, Jaramillo C, Bolivar F, Sanabria F, Osorio P, Orduz C, Guevara DP, Maldonado D. Prevalence of COPD in five Colombian cities situated at low, medium, and high altitude (PREPOCOL study). Chest. 2008 Feb;133(2):343-9. doi: 10.1378/chest.07-1361. Epub 2007 Oct 20.
- Results publication: PubMed 16322646Ramirez-Venegas A, Sansores RH, Perez-Padilla R, Regalado J, Velazquez A, Sanchez C, Mayar ME. Survival of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease due to biomass smoke and tobacco. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006 Feb 15;173(4):393-7. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200504-568OC. Epub 2005 Dec 1.
- Results publication: PubMed 17310045Aaron SD, Vandemheen KL, Fergusson D, Maltais F, Bourbeau J, Goldstein R, Balter M, O'Donnell D, McIvor A, Sharma S, Bishop G, Anthony J, Cowie R, Field S, Hirsch A, Hernandez P, Rivington R, Road J, Hoffstein V, Hodder R, Marciniuk D, McCormack D, Fox G, Cox G, Prins HB, Ford G, Bleskie D, Doucette S, Mayers I, Chapman K, Zamel N, FitzGerald M; Canadian Thoracic Society/Canadian Respiratory Clinical Research Consortium. Tiotropium in combination with placebo, salmeterol, or fluticasone-salmeterol for treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Apr 17;146(8):545-55. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-146-8-200704170-00152. Epub 2007 Feb 19.
Related trials for COPD
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
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
A Study for GSK3862995B in Healthy Participants and Participants With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
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.
Alejandra Ramírez-Venegas, M.Cs. principal investigator
Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias, "Ismael Cosío Villegas"
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 indacaterol and Tiotropium in people with COPD, run by National Institute of Respiratory Diseases, Mexico at 1 site in Mexico.
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 11 inclusion and 6 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 16 Oct 2015. 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 Mexico. 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?
changes in walked meters on six minute walking test (6MWT) from baseline to 23:45 hours after one dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD secondary to biomass exposure. (time frame: baseline, 30, 60, 240 and 23:45 hours post dose of indacaterol vs tiotropium). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02473237, which also lists 7 linked publications.
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 16 Oct 2015.