International Journal of COPD (Mar 2021)

The Utilization and Safety of Umeclidinium and Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in UK Primary Care: A Retrospective Cohort Study

  • Requena G,
  • Dedman D,
  • Quint JK,
  • Ghosh RE,
  • Williams R,
  • Pimenta JM

Journal volume & issue
Vol. Volume 16
pp. 629 – 642

Abstract

Read online

Gema Requena,1 Daniel Dedman,2 Jennifer K Quint,3 Rebecca E Ghosh,2 Rachael Williams,2 Jeanne M Pimenta1 1Respiratory Epidemiology, GSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK; 2Clinical Practice Research Datalink, MHRA, London, UK; 3National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UKCorrespondence: Gema RequenaRespiratory Epidemiology, GSK, 980 Great West Road, Brentford, Middlesex, TW8 9GS, UKTel +44 2080 476893Email [email protected]: Umeclidinium bromide (UMEC) and umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) received European approval for maintenance treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in 2014. This study examined prescribing patterns, possible off-label prescribing, potential safety-related outcomes and adherence of these medications in routine clinical practice post-approval.Methods: This retrospective, multi-database, longitudinal observational study of new users of UMEC, UMEC/VI, or other long-acting bronchodilators (LABD) analyzed data from UK electronic health record databases (primary care cohort), linked to hospital data (linked cohort). Off-label prescribing, safety outcomes (cardiovascular, respiratory, and mortality), treatment patterns, and medication adherence were assessed.Results: In the primary care cohort (new users of UMEC n=3875; UMEC/VI n=2224; other LABD n=32,809), two-thirds of UMEC users were prescribed concomitant inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists. Possible off-label prescribing, defined as use in patients without COPD, was similar for UMEC (7.0%) and UMEC/VI (8.8%), but higher for new users of other LABD (18.0%). There were 547 UMEC users and 512 UMEC/VI users in the linked cohort. In both cohorts, incidence rates (IRs) of cardiovascular outcomes were similar for UMEC and UMEC/VI users (myocardial infarction IR per 1000 person-years [95% CIs]: UMEC 6.9 [4.4, 10.2]; UMEC/VI 6.8 [3.5, 11.9]). IRs of pneumonia and acute COPD exacerbations (AECOPD) were slightly higher among UMEC users compared with UMEC/VI users (AECOPD IR per 1000 person-years [95% CIs]: UMEC 979 [931, 1030]; UMEC/VI 746 [687, 811]). Adherence (medication possession ratio ≥ 80%) was 64% for UMEC and UMEC/VI.Conclusion: Most new users of UMEC were receiving multiple-inhaler triple therapy. Off-label prescribing was uncommon for new users of UMEC and UMEC/VI. Incidence of cardiovascular and respiratory outcomes was as expected for these drug classes. This study provides evidence that UMEC and UMEC/VI are being prescribed appropriately and their safety profile remains unchanged.Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, electronic medical records, long-acting β2-agonist, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, umeclidinium, umeclidinium/vilanterol

Keywords