An Open-label, Low Interventional Clinical Study Investigating Error Rates (Critical and Overall) Prior to Any Retraining in Correct Use of the ELLIPTA Dry Powder Inhaler (DPI) Compared to Other DPIs Including; DISKUS, Turbuhaler, HandiHaler and Breezhaler as a Monotherapy or in Combination, in Adult Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
Overview
- Phase
- Not Applicable
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
- Sponsor
- GlaxoSmithKline
- Enrollment
- 450
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 1-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus Relvar Ellipta With Any Other LAMA)
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- 5 years ago
Overview
Brief Summary
For effective drug delivery using inhalation route, it is important to use the inhalers correctly. This open-label study will evaluate the error rates during the use of ELLIPTA DPI, alone or in combination, in comparison with other DPIs. The study aims to provide clinical evidence in subjects with COPD that the reduced number of steps required to use the ELLIPTA DPI could result in fewer errors made by subjects, and therefore a more consistent treatment. Approximately 450 subjects prescribed with either of RELVAR® ELLIPTA, ANORO® ELLIPTA, INCRUSE® ELLIPTA, SYMBICORT® TURBUHALER®, SERETIDE® DISKUS®, SPIRIVA® HANDIHALER®, ULTIBRO® BREEZHALER® or SEEBRI® BREEZHALER will be included in the study and will have 2 clinical visits. At Visit 1, subjects will take their maintenance DPIs and the critical and overall errors made by subjects will be assessed. After the assessment, subjects will be instructed on correct use or informed of their correct use of their DPIs. The total duration of the study is approximately 6 weeks. ELLIPTA, SERETIDE and DISKUS are registered trademarks of the GSK group of companies. SYMBICORT and TURBUHALER are registered trademarks of the AstraZeneca group of companies. SPIRIVA and HANDIHALER are registered trademarks of Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals. ULTIBRO, BREEZHALER and SEEBRI are registered trademarks of the Novartis group of companies.
Investigators
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •Subjects with documented Physician's diagnosis of COPD, and currently receiving maintenance therapy.
- •Aged \>=40 years of age at inclusion.
- •Using one of the maintenance therapies of interest for at least 3 months prior to inclusion on the study.
- •Males or females.
- •Capable of giving signed informed consent, which includes compliance with the requirements and restrictions listed in the consent form and in the protocol.
Exclusion Criteria
- •Asthma: Subjects with a current diagnosis of asthma. Subjects with a prior history of asthma are eligible if they have a current diagnosis of COPD.
- •Drug/alcohol abuse: Subjects with a known or suspected alcohol or drug abuse history at screening (Visit 0) that in the opinion of the investigator could interfere with the subject's proper completion of the protocol requirement.
- •Investigational product: Subjects who have received an investigational drug and/or medical device within 30 days of entry into this study (Screening/Visit 1), or within five half-lives of the investigational drug, whichever is longer.
- •Investigational product: Subjects who have been trained during participation in any device study in the 6 months prior to entry into this study.
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 1-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus Relvar Ellipta With Any Other LAMA)
Time Frame: Day 1
Participants were asked to demonstrate use of their prescribed DPI at Visit 1 and any error made by the participant was recorded by the HCP in the checklist. Checklist of instructions for correct use were based on the steps for correct use listed in PILs for the respective DPI. The errors made during demonstration by participants were defined as "critical", when the participant received a lesser/no dose. The percentage of participants making at least one critical error in either one or both devices (where applicable) is presented.
Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 1-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)
Time Frame: Day 1
Participants were asked to demonstrate use of their prescribed DPI at Visit 1 and any error made by the participant was recorded by the HCP in the checklist. Checklist of instructions for correct use were based on the steps for correct use listed in PILs for the respective DPI. The errors made during demonstration by participants were defined as "critical", when the participant received a lesser/no dose. The percentage of participants making at least one critical error in either one or both devices (where applicable) is presented. The aim of the analysis was to compare percentage of participants making at least one critical error with Ellipta versus all ICS/LABA+LAMA DPIs; hence, the arms were combined as pre-specified in the protocol and RAP.
Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 1-Primary Device Comparisons
Time Frame: Day 1
Participants were asked to demonstrate use of their prescribed DPI at Visit 1 and any error made by the participant was recorded by the health care practitioner (HCP) in the checklist. Checklist of instructions for correct use were based on the steps for correct use listed in patient instruction leaflets (PILs) for the respective DPI. The errors made during demonstration by participants were defined as "critical", when the participant received a lesser/no dose. The percentage of participants making at least one critical error in the primary DPI is presented. The analysis was performed on the Intent to Treat (ITT) Population which comprised of all enrolled participants who demonstrated use of their primary DPI.
Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 1 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)
Time Frame: Day 1
Participants were asked to demonstrate use of their prescribed DPI at Visit 1 and any error made by the participant was recorded by the HCP in the checklist. Checklist of instructions for correct use were based on the steps for correct use listed in PILs for the respective DPI. The errors made during demonstration by participants were defined as "critical", when the participant received a lesser/no dose. The percentage of participants making at least one critical error in the primary DPI is presented. The aim of the analysis was to compare percentage of participants making at least one critical error with Ellipta versus all ICS/LABA+LAMA DPIs; hence, the arms were combined as pre-specified in the protocol and reporting and analysis plan (RAP).
Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 1-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI)
Time Frame: Day 1
Participants were asked to demonstrate use of their prescribed DPI at Visit 1 and any error made by the participant was recorded by the HCP in the checklist. Checklist of instructions for correct use were based on the steps for correct use listed in PILs for the respective DPI. The errors made during demonstration by participants were defined as "critical", when the participant received a lesser/no dose. The percentage of participants making at least one critical error in either one or both devices (where applicable) is presented. The aim of the analysis was to compare percentage of participants making at least one critical error with Ellipta and Ellipta+LAMA versus Turbuhaler and Turbuhaler+LAMA and Diskus and Diskus+LAMA; hence, the arms were combined as pre-specified in the protocol and RAP.
Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 1 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI
Time Frame: Day 1
Participants were asked to demonstrate use of their prescribed DPI at Visit 1 and any error made by the participant was recorded by the HCP in the checklist. Checklist of instructions for correct use were based on the steps for correct use listed in PILs for the respective DPI. The errors made during demonstration by participants were defined as "critical", when the participant received a lesser/no dose. The percentage of participants making at least one critical error in the primary DPI is presented. The aim of the analysis was to compare percentage of participants making at least one critical error with Ellipta and Ellipta+LAMA versus Turbuhaler and Turbuhaler+LAMA and Diskus and Diskus+LAMA; hence, the arms were combined as pre-specified in the protocol and RAP.
Secondary Outcomes
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 1-Primary Device Comparisons(Day 1)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 1-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus Relvar Ellipta With Any Other LAMA)(Day 1)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 1-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI)(Day 1)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 2 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 2-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI)(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 1 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)(Day 1)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 1-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)(Day 1)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 2 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 2-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 2 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 1 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI(Day 1)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 2-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus Relvar Ellipta With Any Other LAMA)(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 2-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus Relvar Ellipta With Any Other LAMA)(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 2-Primary Device Comparisons(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 2-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta DPI Versus All ICS/LABA DPIs With a LAMA Second DPI)(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Critical Error at Visit 2-Primary Device Comparisons(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 2 in Primary DPI (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI(Week 6)
- Percentage of Participants Making at Least One Overall Error at Visit 2-Dual Device Comparisons (Relvar Ellipta With or Without a LAMA DPI) Versus Any Other ICS/LABA DPI With or Without a LAMA DPI)(Week 6)