ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03376295Updated Jul 24, 2019Results posted

Comparative Effectiveness of COPD Treatments

An observational study in Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive, sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to participants aged Up to 55 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2019-07-24.

Sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim · Observational

Help build ClinicalTrials.gg — short surveys, remote interviews or testing, in your language. Take part →

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
3,954
Ages
Up to 55 Years
Sex
All
01

Where this study stands

Counted across the records on this site · 2026-11-15

Among 236 studies in Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive by Boehringer Ingelheim — 1 open to participants now, 1 under way, 1 of them phase 3. Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive · Boehringer Ingelheim.

Enrollment
28th of 80
3,954 · median 1,577
Started
2017
with 8 others
Observational
81 of 236
none open now
Registered
207th of 236
by date

Among the 236 studies in Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive by Boehringer Ingelheim, this one is the 28th largest by enrollment of the 80 observational ones that give a count, is one of 9 that started in 2017, is one of 81 observational ones, and was the 207th registered.

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive

5,522 studies on the registry are indexed under Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; 857 are open to participants now.

Browse Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive studies →

Open to participants now

1 of the 236 studies in Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive by Boehringer Ingelheim is open now, in 3 countries. Recruiting first, the newest first:

By country, each count listing its studies:

Who these studies take

Of the 557 Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive studies recruiting now, 306 (55%) set no upper age limit and 82 (15%) stop at 75 or younger; 29 take children under 18; 89 take healthy volunteers.

This study: Up to 55 Years · all sexes · no healthy volunteers.

The full table on the hub →

This tab as a report to print or save as PDF → With an account.

Was this useful?
Get alerts for this landscapeDownload CSVNarrow it in search →With an account: a weekly mail of what changed among 236 studies in Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive by Boehringer Ingelheim, or all of them as a file.
02

Study summary

To assess the effectiveness of maintenance treatment of Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with the combination of a long-acting bronchodilators (LABA and the long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) tiotropium (LABA-TIO)) compared with the combination of a LABA and an ICS (LABA-ICS) on the time to COPD exacerbation.

03

Conditions studied

  • Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive
04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Up to 55 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

The base cohort will consist of all patients with a diagnosis of COPD from 1 January 1995 until 31 December 2015 who subsequently received at least one prescription for a long-acting bronchodilator, either LABA or tiotropium, or for an inhaled corticosteroid, alone or in combination, from 1 January 2002 until 31 December 2015.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • New users of long-acting bronchodilators, LABA and tiotropium on the same date or of LABA and ICS, either as a fixed-dose combination or free combination, on the same date between January 2002 and December 2015
  • Diagnosis of and age ≥ 55 years

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Less than one year of medical history information prior to the date of combined treatment initiation (cohort entry)
  • Asthma diagnosis
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

COPD

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: long-term lung disease that makes it hard to breathe out, including emphysema and chronic bronchitis.

05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
3,954 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Subjects diagnosed with COPD

    Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

    Drug: LABA and the LAMA tiotropium (LABA-TIO) · Drug: LABA and an ICS (LABA-ICS)

Interventions

  • DrugLABA and the LAMA tiotropium (LABA-TIO)

    combinational drug

    Also known as: FORVENT, SPIRIVA, SRIVASSO

  • DrugLABA and an ICS (LABA-ICS)

    combinational drug

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The Number of Observed Patients With First Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbation to Occur After Cohort Entry

    The number of observed patients with first COPD exacerbation after cohort entry was reported. The event of time to first COPD exacerbation to occur after cohort entry was defined as a hospitalization for COPD (severe exacerbation) or the prescription of an oral corticosteroid, namely prednisolone (moderate exacerbation) to occur after cohort entry with one-year follow-up, from the as-treated analysis.

    Time frame: 12 Years

Secondary outcomes

  1. The Rate of COPD Exacerbations

    Incidence rates and rate ratios of the moderate or severe exacerbation associated with LABA-TIO relative to LABA-ICS in patients with COPD, with one-year follow-up, from the as-treated analysis, estimated.

    Time frame: 12 years

  2. The Occurrence of the First Hospitalization for Community-acquired Pneumonia (Serious Pneumonia)

    The number of the first occurences of the hospitalization for community-acquired pneumonia (serious pneumonia)associated with LABA-TIO relative to LABA-ICS in patients with COPD, with one-year follow-up, from the as-treated analysis and from the time-dependent on-treatment analysis based on current exposure is presented. On-treatment exposure was based on analysis of current use during the entire 1-year follow-up, allowing patients to switch treatments.

    Time frame: 12 years

07

Results

Posted Jul 8, 2019
Limitations and caveats
The continuous combination treatment duration was short because patients either discontinued one of the components or added another agent.

Participant flow

Primary objective was to assess the effectiveness of maintenance treatment of ChronicObstructivePulmonaryDisease (COPD) with combination of Long-acting beta2-agonist(LABA) and the long-acting muscarinic antagonists(LAMA)tiotropium(TIO) compared with the combination of a LABA and an Inhaled corticosteroids(ICS) on the time to COPD exacerbation.

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneLABA-ICSLABA-TIO
Started19771977
Completed19771977
Not completed00

Outcome measures

PrimaryThe Number of Observed Patients With First Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbation to Occur After Cohort Entry

The number of observed patients with first COPD exacerbation after cohort entry was reported. The event of time to first COPD exacerbation to occur after cohort entry was defined as a hospitalization for COPD (severe exacerbation) or the prescription of an oral corticosteroid, namely prednisolone (moderate exacerbation) to occur after cohort entry with one-year follow-up, from the as-treated analysis.

Time frame:
12 Years
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
The Number of Observed Patients With First Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Exacerbation to Occur After Cohort Entry
ParticipantsLABA-ICSLABA-TIO
Moderate/severe exacerbation344412
Severe exacerbation5560
Statistical analysis
  • LABA-ICS vs LABA-TIO · Cox proportional hazards model · Hazard ratio (hr): 1.04 · 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20The hazard ratio (HR) is adjusted HR after matching on high-dimensional propensity scores, sex and calendar time, adjusted further for the deciles of propensity score.
  • LABA-ICS vs LABA-TIO · Cox proportional hazards model · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.94 · 95% CI 0.65 to 1.36HR presented is adjusted HR after matching on high-dimensional propensity scores, sex and calendar time, adjusted further for the deciles of propensity score.
SecondaryThe Rate of COPD Exacerbations

Incidence rates and rate ratios of the moderate or severe exacerbation associated with LABA-TIO relative to LABA-ICS in patients with COPD, with one-year follow-up, from the as-treated analysis, estimated.

Time frame:
12 years
Reported as:
Number · Events per participant-year
The Rate of COPD Exacerbations
Events per participant-yearLABA-ICSLABA-TIO
Moderate/severe exacerbation0.830.91
Severe exacerbation0.130.11
Statistical analysis
  • LABA-ICS vs LABA-TIO · Negative binomial model · Rate ratio (rr): 1.07 · 95% CI 0.92 to 1.25The rate ratio (RR) (LABA-TIO combination versus the LABA-ICS combination) is adjusted RR after matching on high-dimensional propensity scores, sex and calendar time, adjusted further for the deciles of propensity score.
  • LABA-ICS vs LABA-TIO · Negative binomial model · Rate ratio (rr): 0.85 · 95% CI 0.55 to 1.33The RR (LABA-TIO combination versus the LABA-ICS combination) is adjusted RR after matching on high-dimensional propensity scores, sex and calendar time, adjusted further for the deciles of propensity score.
SecondaryThe Occurrence of the First Hospitalization for Community-acquired Pneumonia (Serious Pneumonia)

The number of the first occurences of the hospitalization for community-acquired pneumonia (serious pneumonia)associated with LABA-TIO relative to LABA-ICS in patients with COPD, with one-year follow-up, from the as-treated analysis and from the time-dependent on-treatment analysis based on current exposure is presented. On-treatment exposure was based on analysis of current use during the entire 1-year follow-up, allowing patients to switch treatments.

Time frame:
12 years
Reported as:
Number · Hospitalizations
The Occurrence of the First Hospitalization for Community-acquired Pneumonia (Serious Pneumonia)
HospitalizationsLABA-ICSLABA-TIO
As-treated analysis4132
On-treatment exposure14349
Statistical analysis
  • LABA-ICS vs LABA-TIO · Cox proportional hazards model · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.66 · 95% CI 0.42 to 1.05The HR is adjusted HR after matching on high-dimensional propensity scores, sex and calendar time, adjusted further for the deciles of propensity score
  • LABA-ICS vs LABA-TIO · Cox proportional hazards model · Hazard ratio (hr): 0.66 · 95% CI 0.48 to 0.92The HR is adjusted HR after matching on high-dimensional propensity scores, sex and calendar time, adjusted further for the deciles of propensity score

Adverse events

Collected over Adverse event information was not applicable for this study.. Non-serious events are listed at a 5% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
LABA-ICS———
LABA-TIO———

Baseline characteristics

The main analysis was on matched patients. The patients with LABA-TIO initiators were matched with initiators of LABA-ICS using a time-conditional propensity score-matched approach. Baseline measures were presented for matched populations.

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(Years)LABA-ICSLABA-TIOTotal
Mean71.8 ± 8.671.9 ± 8.571.85 ± 8.55
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)LABA-ICSLABA-TIOTotal
Female7787781556
Male119911992398
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)LABA-ICSLABA-TIOTotal
Count of participants——0
08

Study locations

1 site
  • Centre for Clinical Epidemiology, McGill University
    Montreal, H3T 1E2, Canada
09

References and documents

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided

10

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Dec 2017 to primary completion in Dec 2017, 0 months.

Results were first posted in Jul 2019, 1 year 6 months after primary completion.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Nov 30, 2017
First posted
Dec 18, 2017
StartActual
Dec 1, 2017
Primary completionActual
Dec 31, 2017
CompletionActual
Dec 31, 2017
Results first posted
Jul 8, 2019
Last update
Jul 24, 2019
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 24, 2019, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03376295
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Dec 18, 2017
Start date
Dec 1, 2017
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2017
Completion
Dec 31, 2017
Results posted
Jul 8, 2019
Last update
Jul 24, 2019

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jul 2019. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion