https://doi.org/10.55788/8b88e600
The BLOCK study, that tested the betablocker metoprolol in 532 patients with severe COPD, was stopped prematurely because of futility and safety concerns [1],â said Dr Bryan Lipworth (University of Dundee, UK). âThere was a 2-fold increase in hospitalisation for severe or very severe exacerbations with the betablocker in this population. So, perhaps betablockers arenât as safe as we thought they were in the COPD population.â The current BICS study assessed the more selective betablocker bisoprolol in patients with GOLD E COPD [2]. Included patients (n=515) were randomised 1:1 to receive either bisoprolol (1.25mg-5mg, determined by dose titration) or placebo for 12 months. Dr Lipworth added that approximately 75% of the patients were on triplet therapy.
The adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 0.97 (95% CI 0.84-1.13; P=0.72), displaying no difference between the study arms with respect to the occurrence of moderate to severe exacerbations. âWe also saw no difference regarding âtime to first exacerbationsâ between the active and placebo arm,â said Dr Lipworth. In contrast to the BLOCK study, this study did not show an increase of very severe COPD exacerbations in the active arm as compared to the placebo arm (adjusted IRR 1.00; 95% CI 0.67-1.50; P=0.99). Finally, there was no substantial effect on quality of life with bisoprolol therapy.
âComparing BLOCK vs BICS, the annualised exacerbation rate was higher in the BICS population (3.5% vs 1.9%), whereas the patients in BLOCK had more severe disease, which was reflected by the use of long-term oxygen therapy (5% vs 40%),â commented Dr Lipworth. âIn general, the fact that bisoprolol is more selective than metoprolol is likely to be the most important contributor to not observing the safety issue in BICS that we did see in BLOCK.â
- Dransfield MT, et al. NEJM. 2019;381:2304-2314
- Lipworth BJ, et al. Bisoprolol in COPD study (BICS): a UK randomized controlled trial of bisoprolol in people with COPD at risk of exacerbation. New clinical trial results in chronic lung disease
Medical writing support was provided by Robert van den Heuvel.
Copyright ©2024 Medicom Medical Publishers
Posted on
Previous Article
« COURSE: Encouraging results for tezepelumab in COPD Next Article
ZEPHYRUS-1: Pamrevlumab fails in IPF »
« COURSE: Encouraging results for tezepelumab in COPD Next Article
ZEPHYRUS-1: Pamrevlumab fails in IPF »
Table of Contents: ATS 2024
Featured articles
NOTUS: Dupilumab safe and efficacious in COPD with type 2 inflammation
Sulthiame may be the next treatment for OSA
Miscellaneous Topics
Pirfenidone may alleviate disease burden in DRCB
Can mindfulness reduce depression and anxiety in ICU survivors?
Exercise and diet improve functional status in PAH
Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
STARSCAPE: Zinpentraxin alfa does not ameliorate health status in IPF
COPD
COURSE: Encouraging results for tezepelumab in COPD
Ensifentrine delays transition from GOLD B to GOLD E in COPD
NOTUS: Dupilumab safe and efficacious in COPD with type 2 inflammation
BOREAS: Blood eosinophil count and FeNO levels predictive of dupilumab response in COPD
Respiratory Infections
Two regimens deliver high sputum conversion rates in M. xenopi pulmonary infection
Patient-reported outcomes improve practice in MAC lung disease
Novel RSV vaccine to prevent serious respiratory illness
Asthma
UCAP: Identify and treat undiagnosed COPD or asthma
Structural and functional lung improvement with dupilumab in asthma
Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Is the Apnea Hypopnea Index ready to be replaced?
Does PAP therapy truly reduce mortality in OSA?
Sulthiame may be the next treatment for OSA
Related Articles
October 29, 2020
COVID-19: What is the risk of reinfection?
© 2024 Medicom Medical Publishers. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy
HEAD OFFICE
Laarderhoogtweg 25
1101 EB Amsterdam
The Netherlands
T: +31 85 4012 560
E: publishers@medicom-publishers.com