Guidelines for the Pharmacologic Treatment of COPD 2023: Canada versus GOLD

Samy Suissa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2023.2292613

2024-02-10

COPD Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Abstract:The 2023 Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) were recently published in two journals [ Citation 1 , Citation 2 ]. The authors claim that these "guideline recommendations are consistent to other recent guidelines such as ... the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) report 2023." A careful reading of these Canadian guidelines find that several key recommendations stand in rather stark contrast with those of the GOLD 2023 report [ Citation 3 ]. Note that I use the term "guidelines" for convenience of comparison, and because it is the term used by the CTS authors, recognizing that some consider them rather as strategies or recommendations. A comparison between the two reports is thus warranted, particularly in terms of the evidence behind the differing recommendations and the potential for unnecessary harm to patients.

respiratory system

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper mainly discusses the differences between the 2023 Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and the 2023 report from the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). The author, Samy Suissa, points out that although CTS claims its guidelines are based on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there are significant differences in some key recommendations between the two.

### Main Issues:
1. **Initial Treatment Recommendations**:
- For low-risk patients (previously had 0-1 moderate exacerbations), both CTS and GOLD recommend using a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA) or a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA). For patients with a high symptom burden, both recommend LABA + LAMA combination bronchodilators.
- For high-risk patients (≥2 moderate or 1 severe exacerbation), GOLD recommends using LABA + LAMA combination bronchodilators and considering triple inhaler therapy (LABA + LAMA + inhaled corticosteroid ICS) when the eosinophil count is ≥300 cells/µL. In contrast, CTS recommends that high-risk and severely symptomatic patients directly use triple inhaler therapy, regardless of the eosinophil count.

2. **Follow-up Treatment Recommendations**:
- When the initial treatment is ineffective, GOLD recommends adjusting the treatment plan based on the patient's main characteristics (such as dyspnea or exacerbation frequency). For low-risk patients with dyspnea, GOLD recommends escalating to LABA + LAMA combination bronchodilators but does not recommend introducing ICS. In contrast, CTS recommends escalating to triple inhaler therapy.
- For high-risk patients, GOLD recommends using triple inhaler therapy only when the eosinophil count is ≥100 or 300 cells/µL; otherwise, it suggests adding other oral medications such as roflumilast or azithromycin. CTS, on the other hand, recommends that high-risk patients already on triple inhaler therapy as initial treatment can further add oral medications such as macrolides, PDE-4 inhibitors, or mucolytics.

### Evidence Evaluation:
- **Evidence Base Issues**: The patients in the RCTs on which the CTS guidelines are based are long-term treated old patients, making the results difficult to apply directly to treatment-naive patients. In contrast, while the GOLD guidelines also provide initial treatment recommendations, they cautiously avoid the "evidence-based" label.
- **Eosinophil Count**: The GOLD guidelines clearly consider the eosinophil count as an important indicator for guiding treatment, whereas the CTS guidelines do not consider this biomarker. The author believes that although the relevant data mostly come from observational studies or post-hoc analyses, there is sufficient evidence to support the importance of eosinophil count in guiding ICS use.
- **Efficacy of Triple Inhaler Therapy**: The CTS guidelines, based on the results of the IMPACT and ETHOS trials, believe that triple inhaler therapy can reduce mortality. However, these trials may be confounded by the sudden discontinuation of ICS, leading to mixed results. By restricting the analysis to subgroups that had not received ICS treatment, it was found that triple inhaler therapy did not significantly reduce mortality.

### Conclusion:
The author believes that the CTS guidelines have insufficient evidence in recommending the broader use of triple inhaler therapy, which may lead to unnecessary risk increases, whereas the GOLD guidelines more cautiously recommend triple inhaler therapy, especially for high-risk patients with higher eosinophil counts.