Roflumilast for asthma: Safety findings from a pooled analysis of ten clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of roflumilast, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, has been extensively researched in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Adverse events (AEs) including headache, diarrhoea and weight loss have been reported. Much less is known about the safety of roflumilast treatment in patients with bronchial asthma. AIM: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of roflumilast using safety data from one open-label and ten pooled placebo-controlled phase II and III clinical studies completed between 1997 and 2005. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The studies were conducted at sites in Europe, North and South America, Africa, Australasia and Asia and study length varied from 4 to 40 weeks. Data for 5169 patients between 12 and 70 years of age, of whom 2851 received roflumilast at doses of 125, 250 and 500 µg, were analyzed. At randomization patients had a forced expiratory flow of 45-100%. RESULTS: Headache was the most frequent AE with an incidence rate of 50 and 29.2 per 100 patient-years in the 500 µg roflumilast and placebo groups, respectively. Gastrointestinal AEs were common. Nausea and diarrhoea occurred in 28.7 and 28.3 per 100 patient-years in the 500 µg roflumilast and placebo groups, respectively. The extent of weight loss in roflumilast-treated patients was small. AEs reported in 465 patients in the 4-week open-label follow-up study reflected those of the pooled studies. CONCLUSIONS: The severity and incidence of AEs reported from this pooled safety analysis confirm that roflumilast is generally well tolerated by patients with asthma. This reflects the general safety profile reported previously in patients with COPD. All studies were funded by Takeda. Trial registration numbers available on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00073177, NCT00076076, NCT00163527.

Roflumilast for asthma: Efficacy findings in placebo-controlled studies.

BACKGROUND: The role of roflumilast as a potential asthma treatment is not yet fully understood. A series of placebo-controlled trials were undertaken in order to investigate the safety and efficacy of roflumilast in asthma. AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of roflumilast in nine randomized proof-of-concept, placebo-controlled monotherapy and combination therapy phase II and III clinical studies performed between 1997 and 2005. METHODS: The studies were conducted at sites in Europe, North and South America, Africa, Australasia and Asia and study length varied from 4 to 24 weeks. Data were analyzed from 4873 patients, 12-70 years of age, of whom 2668 received roflumilast. At randomization patients had a forced expiratory flow (FEV1) of 45-90%. Roflumilast was investigated at doses of 125, 250 and 500 µg versus placebo. In two studies, 500 µg roflumilast was added on top of standard therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), 250 µg fluticasone propionate, or 400 µg beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP). Improvement in FEV1 from baseline was the primary endpoint in seven studies. Key secondary endpoints included asthma symptom scores and time to first severe exacerbation. RESULTS: Roflumilast consistently improved FEV1 across the nine studies compared with placebo, reaching statistical significance in three studies. When given in addition to ICS, roflumilast provided additional improvements in FEV1 which was statistically significant for 500 µg roflumilast/400 µg BDP versus placebo/400 µg BDP. CONCLUSION: Together these studies show that roflumilast has potential as an effective anti-inflammatory therapy for the treatment of asthma. Additional beneficial effects are observed when given in combination with ICS, which warrant further investigation. All studies were funded by Takeda. Trial registration numbers available on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00073177, NCT00076076, NCT00163527.

Comparison of mometasone furoate administered by metered dose inhaler with beclomethasone dipropionate.

This study compared the efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate (MF) administered by metered dose inhaler (MDI) 56, 200 or 500 pg b.i.d., with beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) 168 microg b.i.d. and placebo. Adult patients (n=395), with moderate persistent asthma (FEV1 50-90% of predicted normal), previously maintained on inhaled corticosteroids, were enrolled at 16 centres in a four-week, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, multicentre, dose-ranging trial. At endpoint, FEV1 was significantly improved (p<0.01) with MF-MDI 56, 200 and 500 microg b.i.d., as well as with BDP (6%, 13%, 14% and 4%, respectively), compared with placebo (-12%). Mean change in FVC, FEF2575%, and a.m. and p.m. peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) were also significantly improved for all active treatment groups at endpoint compared with placebo. Asthma symptoms and quality of life (SF-36) related to physical functioning improved with active treatments relative to placebo. All doses of MF-MDI were well tolerated. Treatment with MF-MDI 200 pg b.i.d. was superior to BDP MDI 168 microg b.i.d. or MF-MDI 56 microg b.i.d., with no additional benefit derived from a higher MF-MDI 500 microg b.i.d. dose. MF-MDI was well tolerated, with superior efficacy compared with BDP MDI in these patients with moderate persistent asthma.

Detection of growth suppression in children during treatment with intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate.

OBJECTIVE: Intranasal beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) has generally been considered to have no systemic activity at recommended doses, but the potential for long-term effects on growth has not previously been evaluated. This study was undertaken to assess the effects of 1 year of treatment with intranasal BDP on growth in children. STUDY DESIGN: In this double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study, 100 prepubertal children 6 to 9 years old with perennial allergic rhinitis were treated with aqueous BDP 168 microg twice daily (n = 51) or placebo (n = 49) for 1 year. Subjects' baseline heights were required to be between the 5th and 95th percentile, and skeletal age as determined by left wrist radiograph was required to be within 2 years of chronological age. Washout periods for medications known to affect growth, including other forms of corticosteroids, were established, and these medications were prohibited during the study. However, short courses of oral prednisolone lasting no more than 7 days, and short courses of dermatologic corticosteroids lasting no more than 10 days, were allowed. Height was measured with a stadiometer after 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months of treatment. The hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis was assessed by measurements of 8 AM basal cortisol concentrations and response to. 25 mg cosyntropin stimulation. The primary safety parameter was the rate of change in standing height. Statistical analyses were based on all randomized subjects who received at least 1 dose of medication (intent-to-treat principle). The rate of change in standing height was analyzed for all subjects who entered the study and for those completing the full 12 months of treatment (n = 80). The rate of change in standing height over the 1-year study was calculated as the slope of a linear regression line fitted to each subject's height measurements over time. Because there was a statistically significant between-group difference in standing height at baseline, an analysis of covariance was performed for all analyses of standing height data. RESULTS: Of the 100 subjects enrolled, 90 completed the study. The 2 treatment groups were generally comparable at baseline; however, at baseline, mean age and mean height were significantly greater in the BDP treatment group that the in placebo treatment group. In both analyses, overall growth rate was significantly slower in BDP-treated subjects than placebo-treated subjects. The mean change in standing height after 1 year was 5.0 cm in the BDP-treated subjects compared with 5.9 cm in the placebo-treated subjects. The difference in growth rates was evident as early as the 1-month treatment visit, suggesting that the effect on growth occurred initially. The growth-suppressive effect of BDP remained consistent across all age and gender subgroups, and among subjects with and without a previous history of corticosteroid use. Use of additional exogenous corticosteroids during the study was similar in both groups and did not affect the results. Because there was a baseline imbalance in height, a supplemental analysis of the differences in prestudy growth rates was performed. This analysis found no baseline imbalance in prestudy growth rates. To determine whether the difference in growth rates during the study could be attributed to preexisting growth rates, a z score analysis was performed. The heights of both groups were normalized at baseline and at the end of the study using the US National Center for Health Statistics data for mean and standard deviations of height. This analysis confirmed that the difference in growth rates between the 2 groups was primarily attributable to the treatment rather than to any preexisting difference in growth. Additional analyses confirmed that the results were not influenced by outlier values. No significant between-group difference were found in the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis assessments. No unusual adverse events were observed. (ABSTRACT

Comparison of powder and aerosol formulations of salmeterol in the treatment of asthma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of the aerosol metered-dose inhaler (MDI) formulation of salmeterol for asthma symptoms have been established. Recently, salmeterol has been introduced as a micronized powder formulation administered via a breath-activated multidose powder inhaler (Diskus). OBJECTIVE: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study involving 498 adolescents and adults with mild-to-moderate asthma was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of salmeterol powder 50 microg twice daily via Diskus, salmeterol aerosol 42 microg twice daily via MDI, and placebo. METHODS: Patients were randomized to one of the three treatment groups for 12 weeks. Efficacy was assessed by serial measurements of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) over 12 hours, daily peak expiratory flow (PEF), self-rated asthma symptom scores, nighttime awakenings, and supplemental albuterol use. Safety of each treatment was evaluated by monitoring vital signs, electrocardiograms, Holter monitoring, and occurrence of adverse events. RESULTS: As compared with placebo, both salmeterol powder and aerosol produced significant improvement in FEV1 and PEF and decreased nighttime awakenings and supplemental albuterol use. There were no significant differences in the efficacy of the two salmeterol formulations. The magnitude of improvement in pulmonary function was undiminished over the 12-week study. Both formulations of salmeterol were well tolerated, with safety profiles not significantly different from placebo. CONCLUSION: Results of this study indicate that salmeterol, administered either as a powder 50 microg twice daily via Diskus or as an aerosol 42 microg twice daily via MDI, produces clinically significant and comparable improvement in pulmonary function and is well tolerated in patients with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma.

Montelukast added to inhaled beclomethasone in treatment of asthma. Montelukast/Beclomethasone Additivity Group.

The primary objective of this study was to determine whether montelukast, an oral leukotriene receptor antagonist, provides additional clinical benefit to the effect of inhaled corticosteroids. A total of 642 patients with chronic asthma (FEV(1) 50 to 85% of predicted value and at least a predefined level of asthma symptoms) incompletely controlled with inhaled beclomethasone, 200 microg twice daily using a spacer device, during the 4-wk run-in period were randomly allocated, in a double-blind, double-dummy manner to one of four treatment groups: (1) montelukast 10 mg plus continuing inhaled beclomethasone; (2) placebo tablet plus continuing inhaled beclomethasone; (3) montelukast 10 mg and inhaled placebo (after blind beclomethasone removal); and (4) placebo tablet and inhaled placebo (after blind beclomethasone removal). The primary endpoints were FEV(1) and daytime asthma symptoms score. Montelukast provided significant (p < 0.05) clinical benefit in addition to inhaled beclomethasone by improving FEV(1), daytime asthma symptom scores, and nocturnal awakenings. Blind removal of beclomethasone in the presence of placebo tablets caused worsening of asthma control, demonstrating that patients received clinical benefit from inhaled corticosteroids. Blind removal of beclomethasone in the presence of montelukast resulted in less asthma control but not to the level of the placebo group. All treatments were well tolerated; clinical and laboratory adverse experiences were generally similar to placebo treatment in this study. In conclusion, montelukast provided additional asthma control to patients benefitting from, but incompletely controlled on, inhaled beclomethasone.

Placebo-controlled, comparative study of the efficacy and safety of triamcinolone acetonide inhalation aerosol with the non-CFC propellant HFA-134a in patients with asthma. Azmacort HFA Clinical Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) inhalation aerosol (Azmacort Inhalation Aerosol), a well-established corticosteroid treatment for bronchial asthma, utilizes the chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellant P-12, which will be phased out because of environmental concerns. Two TAA aerosol formulations have been developed using a non-chlorofluorocarbon propellant, HFA-134a (Azmacort HFA Inhalation Aerosol delivering TAA 75 microg/puff or 225 microg/puff). OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy and safety of the new 225 microg/puff formulation (TAA-HFA 225) to the marketed TAA inhalation aerosol (TAA-CFC) and to placebo in adult patients with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma. METHODS: After a 5-day to 21-day baseline period during which all patients received TAA-CFC 150 microg/day, 538 patients were randomized to one of the following treatment schedules: TAA-HFA 450, 900, or 1800 microg/day; TAA-CFC 450 or 900 microg/day; or placebo for 12 weeks. RESULTS: All active treatment groups showed statistically significant improvement compared with placebo in pulmonary function (FEV1, FEF25-75%, morning and evening PEF), use of rescue albuterol, and asthma symptom scores. Improvements in all variables occurred within 1 week of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The TAA-HFA 225 exhibited similar safety and efficacy profiles to the two equivalent doses of TAA-CFC studied. Our findings indicate that TAA-HFA is a safe and effective replacement for the currently marketed CFC-containing product. The higher strength 225 microg/puff formulation provides effective control of asthma with fewer inhalations.

Dose-ranging study of a new steroid for asthma: mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler.

A new formulation of mometasone furoate (MF) for administration by dry powder inhaler (DPI) was evaluated for the treatment of asthma. A 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-ranging study compared the efficacy and safety of three doses of MF DPI (100, 200 and 400 mcg b.i.d) with beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) 168 mcg b.i.d. administered by metered dose inhaler in 365 adult or adolescent patients being treated with inhaled glucocorticoids. The mean change from baseline to endpoint (last treatment visit) for forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) was the primary efficacy variable. Secondary efficacy variables included other objective measures of pulmonary function [forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory flow 25-75% (FEV25-75%.) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR)] as well as subjective measures of therapeutic response (patients' daily evaluation of asthma symptoms and physicians' evaluation). At endpoint, all four active treatments were significantly more effective than placebo (P < 0.01) in improving FEV1 (MF DPI 5 to 7%, BDP 3%, placebo -6.6%) and all other measures of pulmonary function (FVC: MF DPI 4 to 5%, BDP 2%, placebo -4.7%; FEF25-75%: MF DPI 6 to 18%, BDP 7.5%, placebo -9.5%; PEFR (AM): MF DPI 5 to 10%, BDP 5.7%, placebo -7%). A consistent trend was observed for better improvement in patients treated with MF DPI 200 mcg b.i.d. than with MF DPI 100 mcg b.i.d., with no apparent additional benefit of MF DPI 400 mcg b.i.d. Results for the MF DPI 100 mcg b.i.d. and BDP 168 mcg b.i.d. treatment groups were similar. Patients' and physicians' subjective evaluations of symptoms found similar improvement in the MF DPI 200 and 400 mcg b.i.d. treatment groups, which were slightly better than that in the MF DPI 100 mcg b.i.d. group. Symptoms tended to worsen in the placebo group. MF DPI was well tolerated at all dose levels and the most frequently reported treatment-related adverse effects were headache, pharyngitis and oral candidiasis. No evidence of HPA-axis suppression was detected in any treatment group. In summary, all doses of MF DPI were well tolerated and significantly improved lung function and MF DPI 400 mcg (200 mcg b.i.d.) was the optimal dose in this study of patients with moderate persistent asthma.

Montelukast dose selection in 6- to 14-year-olds: comparison of single-dose pharmacokinetics in children and adults.

Montelukast, an oral leukotriene-receptor antagonist, has demonstrated efficacy and tolerability for the treatment of chronic asthma in adults. A once-daily 10 mg dose (film-coated tablet) was selected as the optimal adult dose based on dose-ranging studies. Asthma is a similar disease and is treated with the same medications in children and adults. These observations suggested that a dose of montelukast in children providing overall drug exposure (i.e., montelukast plasma concentrations) similar to that of the 10 mg film-coated tablet dose in adults would be efficacious, well tolerated, and obviate the need for separate dose-ranging studies in children. Therefore, the dose of montelukast for 6- to 14-year-old children was selected by identifying the chewable tablet dose of montelukast yielding a single-dose area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) comparable to that achieved with the adult 10 mg film-coated tablet dose. Based on this approach, which included dose normalization of data from several pediatric pharmacokinetic studies, a 5 mg chewable tablet dose of montelukast was selected for use in clinical efficacy studies in 6- to 14-year-old children with asthma.

Fluticasone propionate powder and lack of clinically significant effects on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and bone mineral density over 2 years in adults with mild asthma.

BACKGROUND: Although inhaled corticosteroids are widely used for the treatment of inflammation in asthma, prospective, long-term, placebo-controlled trials characterizing their systemic safety with chronic use are lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to prospectively evaluate the long-term safety of inhaled fluticasone propionate therapy. METHODS: Fluticasone propionate powder, 500 microgram, or placebo was administered twice daily by means of the Diskhaler for 104 weeks to 64 adults with mild persistent asthma in a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Primary safety variables were measured at baseline and every 6 months thereafter. Although evaluation of efficacy was not an objective of this study, pulmonary function testing was performed at monthly intervals. RESULTS: Two years of treatment with fluticasone propionate had no significant effects on the skeletal system. No clinically significant changes were observed in ophthalmic parameters (glaucoma and posterior subcapsular cataracts). Mean change from baseline in lumbar spine (L1 to L4 ) bone density at week 104 was not significantly different between fluticasone propionate (-0.006 +/- 0.008 g/cm2) and placebo (-0.007 +/- 0.010 g/cm2). Markers of bone formation (serum osteocalcin) and resorption (urinary N-telopeptide) did not differ significantly between treatment groups. The effects of fluticasone propionate treatment on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis were minimal, with no alterations in morning plasma cortisol concentrations and minor but statistically significant decreases in poststimulation mean peak plasma cortisol concentrations (P =.021) and 8-hour plasma cortisol area under the curve values (P =.020) at week 104. Drug-related adverse events were primarily topical effects of inhaled corticosteroids. Pulmonary function improved significantly during 2 years of fluticasone propionate treatment. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone propionate powder, 500 microgram twice daily for up to 2 years, was efficacious and well tolerated, with no clinically relevant effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, bone density, or ophthalmic parameters in adults with mild asthma.

Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% and beclomethasone nasal spray alone and in combination for the treatment of rhinorrhea in perennial rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Perennial rhinitis is a common condition that affects up to 10% to 20% of the population. Multiple agents are frequently administered since no single agent provides complete relief. Studies assessing the benefit/risk of combined therapy are important especially for newly approved agents such as ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03%, a topical anticholinergic agent, approved specifically for the treatment of rhinorrhea in allergic and non-allergic perennial rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of the combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) and beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid) against that of either active agent alone for the treatment of rhinorrhea. DESIGN: Multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized active- and placebo-controlled, parallel trial. SETTING: Allergist and general practitioner clinical practices. PATIENTS: Five hundred thirty-three patients with perennial rhinitis (279 allergic and 274 non-allergic), 8 to 75 years of age, who had at least a mild degree of severity of rhinorrhea for a minimum of 2 hours per day during the 1 week screening period as well as congestion or sneezing also of at least mild severity. INTERVENTION: Either (1) ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) plus beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid), (2) ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% (42 microg per nostril tid) alone, (3) beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray (84 microg per nostril bid) alone, or (4) vehicle [matching placebo nasal spray for the ipratropium bromide (2 sprays per nostril tid)] or beclomethasone dipropionate (2 sprays per nostril bid). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Severity and duration of rhinorrhea, and patient and physician global assessment of control of rhinorrhea. RESULTS: Ipratropium bromide nasal spray plus beclomethasone nasal spray was more effective than either active agent alone or vehicle in reducing the average severity and duration of rhinorrhea during 4 weeks of treatment. The advantage of ipratropium bromide plus beclomethasone nasal spray was evident by the first day of combined treatment and continued throughout the 2-week treatment period. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray had a faster onset of action during the first week of treatment and reduced the duration of rhinorrhea more than beclomethasone. Beclomethasone nasal spray was more effective in reducing the severity of congestion and sneezing than ipratropium. In patients who had not responded well to a nasal steroid prior to participation in the study based on a questionnaire administered at screening, ipratropium bromide was as effective in the steroid non-responders as steroid responders, whereas beclomethasone was more effective in steroid responders. Combined active therapy was well tolerated with no increase in adverse events over that seen previously with ipratropium bromide or beclomethasone nasal spray alone. CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray with beclomethasone dipropionate nasal spray is more effective than either active agent for the treatment of rhinorrhea, and does not result in a potentiation of adverse drug reactions. Ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% alone should be considered in patients for whom rhinorrhea is the primary symptom, and its use in combination with a nasal steroid should be considered in patients where rhinorrhea is one of the predominant symptoms, or in patients with rhinorrhea not fully responsive to other therapy.

Long-term cardiovascular safety of salmeterol powder pharmacotherapy in adolescent and adult patients with chronic persistent asthma: a randomized clinical trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the long-term cardiovascular safety of salmeterol powder vs placebo in adolescent and adult patients with mild persistent asthma. DESIGN: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. SETTING: Eighteen US clinical centers. PATIENTS: Three hundred fifty-two patients (> or = 12 years) with mild persistent asthma (duration > or = 6 months) requiring pharmacotherapy; with FEV1 of 70 to 90% of predicted and without abnormal ECG/continuous ambulatory ECG (Holter). INTERVENTIONS: Randomized to twice-daily salmeterol powder (50 microg) or placebo via breath-actuated device for 52 weeks. Backup albuterol was available to control asthma symptoms. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Cardiovascular safety was regularly assessed by 12-lead ECG with a 15-s lead II rhythm strip, 24-h continuous ambulatory ECG (Holter) monitoring, serial vital sign measurements, and review of adverse cardiovascular events. No deaths occurred during the study. No clinically significant between-group differences were observed in pulse rate, ECG QTc interval, median number of ventricular or supraventricular ectopic events, incidence of ventricular ectopic couplets and runs, or incidence of > 100 ventricular or supraventricular ectopic events in 24 h. No clinically significant between-group differences were observed in arterial BP or incidence of adverse cardiovascular events. Salmeterol was well tolerated throughout the 52-week study period, with a cardiovascular safety profile similar to that of placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term, twice-daily pharmacotherapy with salmeterol powder is safe and is not associated with unfavorable clinically significant changes in cardiac function or increases in cardiovascular adverse effects.

Inhaled salmeterol and fluticasone: a study comparing monotherapy and combination therapy in asthma.

BACKGROUND: The current stepwise approach to pharmacotherapy in the treatment of asthma includes the initiation of an inhaled corticosteroid with the addition of a long-acting inhaled bronchodilator if low dose inhaled corticosteroid fails to control asthma symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether initiation of salmeterol and fluticasone propionate treatment together improves asthma control greater than initiation of monotherapy with the individual agents alone with no additional safety risk in patients with asthma who had not previously been treated with inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS: A total of 136 male and female patients at least 12 years of age with asthma [forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV) between 50% and 80% of predicted] were randomized to twice daily salmeterol 42 microg, fluticasone propionate 88 microg, fluticasone propionate 220 microg, salmeterol 42 microg plus fluticasone propionate 88 microg, salmeterol 42 microg plus fluticasone propionate 220 microg, or placebo for 4 weeks. RESULTS: Patients treated with salmeterol combined with fluticasone propionate had improvements over baseline in FEV at endpoint that were at least twice as great (0.6 to 0.7 L) as improvements in patients treated with salmeterol (0.3 L) or fluticasone propionate alone (0.3 L) (P < .05). Patient-rated data (peak expiratory flow, asthma symptom scores, percent of days with no asthma symptoms) confirmed greater (P < .05) mean change from baseline improvements after combined treatment compared with fluticasone propionate alone. No clinically significant differences were noted between treatment groups in any safety measurement. CONCLUSION: Initiation of maintenance therapy with salmeterol and fluticasone propionate in patients with asthma treated with short-acting beta2-agonists alone provides greater improvements in pulmonary function and symptom control than initiation of maintenance therapy with fluticasone propionate alone.

Hydrofluoroalkane-134a beclomethasone dipropionate, 400 microg, is as effective as chlorofluorocarbon beclomethasone dipropionate, 800 microg, for the treatment of moderate asthma.

OBJECTIVE: The improved lung deposition of hydrofluoroalkane-134a beclomethasone dipropionate (HFA-BDP) extrafine aerosol compared with chlorofluorocarbon beclomethasone dipropionate (CFC-BDP) suggests that lower doses of HFA-BDP may be required to provide equivalent asthma control. The present study was undertaken to test this hypothesis. DESIGN: A 10- to 12-day run-in period confirmed that patients met established criteria of at least moderate asthma and the asthma was inadequately controlled by current therapy (inhaled beta-agonist and CFC-BDP [< or = 400 microg/d]). A short course of oral prednisone, 30 mg/d for 7 to 12 days, was followed to establish the patients were steroid responsive and to provide an "in-study" baseline of "optimal" asthma control. PATIENTS: A total of 347 patients were then randomized to HFA-BDP 400 microg/d, CFC-BDP 800 microg/d, or HFA-placebo for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Morning peak expiratory flow (AM PEF) measurements showed that HFA-BDP 400 microg/d achieved equivalent control of asthma to CFC-BDP 800 microg/d at all time intervals after oral steroid treatment. All other efficacy variables supported the AM PEF results and both active treatments were more effective than placebo. The safety profile of HFA-BDP compared favorably with that of CFC-BDP with no unexpected adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that HFA-BDP provides equivalent control of moderate or moderately severe asthma as CFC-BDP in the population studied, but at half the total daily dose.

Montelukast, a potent leukotriene receptor antagonist, causes dose-related improvements in chronic asthma. Montelukast Asthma Study Group.

The leukotrienes are known to be important mediators of bronchial asthma. The ability of montelukast, a potent and selective CysLT1 leukotriene receptor antagonist, to cause a dose-related improvement in chronic asthma was investigated in a placebo-controlled, multicentre, parallel-group study. After a two week placebo run-in period, chronic asthmatic patients with a forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 40-80% predicted with > or = 15% increase (absolute value) after beta2-agonist were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups (placebo or montelukast 2, 10, or 50 mg once daily in the evening) for a three week, double-blind treatment period. For patient-reported end-points (daytime symptom score, use of as needed inhaled beta2 agonist, asthma-specific quality of life) and frequency of asthma exacerbations, montelukast 10 and 50 mg caused similar responses, superior to 2 mg and significantly (p<0.05; linear trend test) different from placebo. All three doses caused improvements in FEV1 and morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) that were significantly (p<0.05) different from placebo. Differences (least square mean) between the pooled 10 and 50 mg montelukast treatment groups and placebo were: 7.1% change from baseline in FEV1, 19.23 L x min(-1) in morning PEFR, -0.29 in daytime asthma symptom score (absolute value), and -0.82 in beta2-agonist use (puff x day(-1)). The incidence of adverse experiences was neither dose-related nor different between montelukast and placebo treatments. We conclude that montelukast causes a dose-related improvement in patient-reported asthma end-points over the range 2-50 mg. Montelukast causes benefit to chronic asthmatic patients by improving asthma control end-points.

Montelukast, a once-daily leukotriene receptor antagonist, in the treatment of chronic asthma: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial. Montelukast Clinical Research Study Group.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical effect of oral montelukast sodium, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, in asthmatic patients aged 15 years or more. DESIGN: Randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. A 2-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period was followed by a 12-week, double-blind treatment period (montelukast sodium, 10 mg, or matching placebo, once daily at bedtime) and a 3-week, double-blind, washout period. SETTING/PATIENTS: Fifty clinical centers randomly allocated 681 patients with chronic, stable asthma to receive placebo or montelukast after demonstrating a forced expiratory volume in 1 second 50% to 85% of the predicted value, at least a 15% improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (absolute value) after inhaled beta-agonist administration, a minimal predefined level of daytime asthma symptoms, and inhaled beta-agonist use. Twenty-three percent of the patients used concomitant inhaled corticosteroids. PRIMARY END POINTS: Forced expiratory volume in 1 second and daytime asthma symptoms. RESULTS: Montelukast improved airway obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second, morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate) and patient-reported end points (daytime asthma symptoms, "as-needed" beta-agonist use, nocturnal awakenings) (P<.001 compared with placebo). Montelukast provided near-maximal effect in these end points within the first day of treatment. Tolerance and rebound worsening of asthma did not occur. Montelukast improved outcome end points, including asthma exacerbations, asthma control days (P<.001 compared with placebo), and decreased peripheral blood eosinophil counts (P<.001 compared with placebo). The incidence of adverse events and discontinuations from therapy were similar in the montelukast and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast, compared with placebo, significantly improved asthma control during a 12-week treatment period. Montelukast was generally well tolerated, with an adverse event profile comparable with that of placebo.

Dose-related response to inhaled fluticasone propionate in patients with methacholine-induced bronchial hyperresponsiveness: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Dose-response relationships with inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of asthma have been difficult to establish. A multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of low doses of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) in patients with mild to moderate asthma. Methacholine challenge testing was conducted in addition to measurement of traditional efficacy variables. After a single-blind screening period, 138 patients > or = 12 years of age were randomly assigned to receive placebo, FP 50 microg, or FP 100 microg, twice daily for 8 weeks. The results of methacholine challenge testing averaged over all visits favored FP 200 microg/day over placebo and FP 100 microg/day (p < 0.05); there were no significant differences between placebo and FP 100 microg/day. Mean changes from baseline to endpoint favored each dose of FP over placebo based on forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1), patient-measured peak expiratory flow (PEF), total symptom scores, and rescue bronchodilator use (p < 0.05); there were no differences in these parameters between the two doses of FP. The addition of methacholine challenge testing allowed definition of a dose-response relationship that was not apparent with traditional efficacy variables.

Budesonide delivered by Turbuhaler is effective in a dose-dependent fashion when used in the treatment of adult patients with chronic asthma.

BACKGROUND: Airway inflammation is a hallmark of asthma, therefore current treatment recommendations include the use of inhaled glucocorticosteroids (GCS). However, there is little evidence that the effects of inhaled GCS are dose dependent. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of a second-generation GCS, budesonide, delivered by Turbuhaler, in adults with chronic asthma. METHODS: In a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group study, 473 subjects 18 to 70 years of age received either placebo or budesonide (200, 400, 800, or 1600 microg total daily dose) administered twice daily. Primary efficacy end points were mean change from baseline for FEV1 and morning peak expiratory flow. Safety was assessed by reported adverse events and by a cosyntropin-stimulation test. RESULTS: The mean baseline FEV1 was 63% to 66% of predicted normal value between groups. All doses of budesonide were more effective than placebo (p < 0.001). The mean changes in morning peak expiratory flow were 12, 22, 27, and 30 L/min in the 200, 400, 800, and 1600 microg budesonide total daily dose groups, respectively, and -27 L/min for the placebo group. A statistically significant dose-response effect for the mean change from baseline over the 12-week study was seen for both morning peak expiratory flow and FEV1. Budesonide-treated subjects also demonstrated significant reduction in asthma symptoms and bronchodilator use compared with placebo. There were no clinically significant differences in treatment-related adverse experiences among groups. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide administered by Turbuhaler exhibited a dose response and was effective at low doses. It was well tolerated and significantly more effective than placebo.

Efficacy of inhaled fluticasone propionate in asthma results from topical and not from systemic activity.

The objective of this study was to determine whether the therapeutic benefits of inhaled fluticasone propionate are mediated through topical or systemic effects. Two hundred seventy-four patients with asthma receiving beclomethasone dipropionate or triamcinolone acetonide during a 2-wk, single-blind, run-in period were randomized to inhaled fluticasone propionate powder 100 or 500 micrograms twice daily, oral fluticasone propionate 20 mg once daily, or placebo during a 6-wk treatment period. Patients receiving inhaled fluticasone propionate had a significantly greater probability of remaining in the study over time compared with patients receiving oral fluticasone propionate or placebo (p = 0.001). FEV1 and PEF rates at end point were significantly higher with inhaled fluticasone propionate treatment regimens than with oral fluticasone propionate (with the exception of PEF rates for inhaled fluticasone propionate 100 micrograms) or placebo treatments (p < or = 0.004). Systemic exposure to fluticasone propionate as assessed by trough plasma concentrations and/or 12-hr plasma concentration area under the curve analyses (AUC12) was higher with the oral fluticasone propionate than with the two inhaled fluticasone propionate treatment groups. The results of this study suggest that the therapeutic benefits of inhaled fluticasone propionate are mediated through topical effects in the lungs and not through systemic effects.

Fluticasone propionate powder administered through Diskhaler versus triamcinolone acetonide aerosol administered through metered-dose inhaler in patients with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Attempts to delineate efficacy and safety differences among inhaled corticosteroids have been difficult because of the lack of well-controlled, comparative studies reported in the medical literature. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study was conducted in 24 outpatient centers. A total of 291 male and female patients at least 12 years of age with asthma (FEV1 between 50% and 80% of predicted value), who had previously received maintenance therapy with beclomethasone dipropionate or triamcinolone acetonide, were switched to treatment with fluticasone propionate powder (250 microg twice daily), triamcinolone acetonide aerosol (200 microg four times daily), or placebo for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Mean increase in FEV1 from baseline to end point was significantly (p = 0.009) greater in patients switched to treatment with fluticasone compared with patients switched to treatment with triamcinolone (0.27 L and 0.07 L, respectively). At end point, mean increase in morning peak expiratory flow from baseline was 21 L/min with fluticasone compared with mean decreases of 6 L/min and 28 L/min with triamcinolone and placebo, respectively (p < 0.001 vs triamcinolone and placebo). Supplemental rescue albuterol use decreased by 30% from baseline with fluticasone (p < 0.05 vs triamcinolone and placebo) compared with triamcinolone (6%) or placebo (increased by 50%). The percentage of patients withdrawn from the study because they met predefined lack-of-efficacy criteria was higher with placebo (60%) and triamcinolone (27%) than with fluticasone (17%). Incidence of adverse events and low morning plasma cortisol concentrations were similar across treatment groups except for oral candidiasis (p = 0.035, fluticasone vs placebo). CONCLUSION: Fluticasone propionate powder twice daily (500 microg/day) was superior in efficacy to triamcinolone acetonide aerosol four times daily (800 microg/day) in patients with persistent asthma.