A randomized primary care trial of steroid titration against mannitol in persistent asthma: STAMINA trial.

BACKGROUND: We compared titrating inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) against mannitol airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) or a reference strategy (control) based on symptoms, reliever use, and lung function in primary care. METHODS: One hundred sixty-four patients with persistent asthma were randomized in parallel group fashion following an initial ICS tapering. Subsequent ICS doses (as ciclesonide) were titrated against either the provocative dose of mannitol causing a 10% fall in FEV(1) (PD(10)) (AHR strategy) or a control group (reference strategy) over a 1-year period. RESULTS: One hundred nineteen participants (n = 61 AHR, n = 58 control) completed the study. Time to first mild exacerbation was not significantly different: hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.716-2.31; P = .40. Although there were 27% fewer total number of mild exacerbations over 12 months in AHR vs control groups (n = 84 vs n = 115, P = .03), there was no difference in severe exacerbations (n = 12 vs n = 13). No other significant differences were seen between groups with the exception of mannitol PD(10) and ICS dose. There was a 1.52 (95% CI, 0.61-2.42; P = .001) doubling dose difference in mannitol PD(10) between AHR vs control groups. The final mean daily ciclesonide dose was higher (P < .0001) in AHR vs control groups (514 µg vs 208 µg), with no associated significant suppression of overnight urinary cortisol/creatinine. Significant improvements were seen within the AHR group but not the control group for the provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (P < .05), salivary eosinophilic cationic protein (P < .05), exhaled nitric oxide (P < .05), symptoms (P < .005), and reliever use (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Mannitol challenge was well tolerated in a primary care setting. Using mannitol resulted in exposure to a higher dose of ciclesonide, which was associated with equivocal effects on exacerbations without associated adrenal suppression. Large-scale trials using mannitol in patients with more severe disease may now be warranted to further define its role. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01216579; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Fluticasone/Salmeterol combination confers benefits in people with asthma who smoke.

BACKGROUND: Smoking induces airway inflammation and relative resistance to inhaled steroids. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects on airway hyperresponsiveness of adding salmeterol to fluticasone vs doubling the dose of fluticasone in patients with asthma who smoked and patients with asthma who did not smoke. METHODS: Sixteen patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma who did not smoke and 15 such patients who smoked completed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study. They received either a fluticasone/salmeterol combination (FP/SM) (125/25 µg) two puffs bid (plus fluticasone placebo), or active fluticasone (250 µg) two puffs bid (plus FP/SM placebo), for 2 weeks each, with baselines after 1-week to 2-week run-in and washout periods. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the provocative concentration of methacholine required to produce a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)). RESULTS: In the patients who did not smoke, there were similar improvements in the methacholine PC(20) with the use of fluticasone and FP/SM. The patients who smoked gained a benefit from FP/SM but not fluticasone, amounting to a PC(20) difference of 1.6 doubling dilutions (95% CI, 1.0-2.2), P < .01. The provocative dose of mannitol required to produce a 15% fall in FEV(1) (PD(15)) showed greater improvements with FP/SM than fluticasone in both patients who smoked and did not smoke. Similar differences in airway caliber between those who smoked and did not smoke were observed in FEV(1) and airway resistance. CONCLUSIONS: FP/SM confers greater improvements in airway hyperresponsiveness and airway caliber in patients with asthma who smoke compared with double the dose of fluticasone. We hypothesize that in the presence of relative steroid resistance, the smooth muscle stabilization conferred by salmeterol is of greater clinical importance in patients who smoke than in those who do not smoke. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov: No.: NCT00830505; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparison of hydrofluoroalkane and chlorofluorocarbon formulations of budesonide.

AIMS: A hydrofluoroalkane formulation of budesonide pressurized metered-dose inhaler has been developed to replace the existing chlorofluorocarbon one. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of both formulations. METHODS: Systemic bioavailability and bioactivity of both hydrofluoroalkane and chlorofluorocarbon pressurized metered-dose inhaler formulations at 800 µg twice daily was determined during a randomized crossover systemic pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic study at steady state in healthy volunteers. Measurements included the following: plasma cortisol AUC(24h) [area under the concentration-time curve (0-24 h)], budesonide AUC(0-12h) and C(max) . Clinical efficacy was determined during a randomized crossover pharmacodynamic study in asthmatic patients receiving 200 µg followed by 800 µg budesonide via chlorofluorocarbon or hydrofluoroalkane pressurized metered-dose inhaler each for 4 weeks. Methacholine PC(20) (primary outcome), exhaled nitric oxide, spirometry, peak expiratory flow and symptoms were evaluated. RESULTS: In the pharmacokinetic study, there were no differences in cortisol, AUC(0-12h) [area under the concentration-time curve (0-12 h)], T(max) (time to maximum concentration) or C(max) (peak serum concentration) between the hydrofluoroalkane and chlorofluorocarbon pressurized metered-dose inhaler. The ratio of budesonide hydrofluoroalkane vs. chlorofluorocarbon pressurized metered-dose inhaler for cortisol AUC(24h) was 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.93-1.11) and budesonide AUC(0-12h) was 1.03 (90% confidence interval 0.9-1.18). In the asthma pharmacodynamic study, there was a significant dose response (P < 0.0001) for methacholine PC(20) (provocative concentration of methacholine needed to produce a 20% fall in FEV(1) ) with a relative potency ratio of 1.10 (95% confidence interval 0.49-2.66), and no difference at either dose. No significant differences between formulations were seen with the secondary outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrofluoroalkane and chlorofluorocarbon formulations of budesonide were therapeutically equivalent in terms of relative lung bioavailability, airway efficacy and systemic effects.

Nasal AMP and histamine challenge within and outside the pollen season in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Nasal hyperreactivity is a prominent feature of allergic rhinitis. Variation in nasal hyperreactivity with different challenge agents in and out of the pollen season has not been examined. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare nasal hyperreactivity with different challenge agents before, during, and after the pollen season. METHODS: Grass pollen-monosensitized patients performed cumulative-dose challenges with nasal AMP (25-800 mg · mL(-1)) and histamine (0.25-8 mg · mL(-1)) before, during, and after the grass pollen season. Outcomes included the provocative concentration of agent causing a 30% decrease in the peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) (PC(30)), recovery profile, and diary cards. RESULTS: Nineteen participants completed per protocol. AMP PC(30) values for PNIF worsened by 1.33 (95% CI, 0.20-2.44; P = .02) doubling dilutions during the season but recovered after the season. The AMP recovery curve showed a -14.39% difference (95% CI, -21.11% to -7.66%; P < .001) during the season and remained abnormal after the season (-8.05% [95% CI, -14.78% to -1.33%; P < .05). Histamine PC(30) values did not change during the season, but recovery was prolonged by -14.47% (95% CI, -22.19% to -6.76%, P < .001), returning to baseline values after the season. Nasal symptoms, domiciliary PNIF, and serum eosinophil-derived neurotoxin levels returned to baseline values after the season. CONCLUSIONS: There is a reduction in AMP PC threshold but not histamine PC threshold during the pollen season, indicating that AMP is a more sensitive indicator of allergic inflammation. The residual hyperreactivity to nasal AMP, but not histamine, outside of the pollen season, seen as a persistently prolonged recovery curve, suggests the presence of primed airway mucosal mast cells, even in asymptomatic patients, and persistent activation of mediator pathways, such as cysteinyl leukotrienes.

Assessment of small-airways disease using alveolar nitric oxide and impulse oscillometry in asthma and COPD.

The contribution of the alveolar compartment to exhaled nitric oxide (alveolar nitric oxide or CA(NO)) can be calculated as a surrogate of distal inflammation. This value should be corrected for nitric oxide produced in the conducting airways which "back-diffuses" into the alveolar compartment (Corrected CA(NO)). Impulse oscillometry (IOS) (Nava et al., Am J Respir Crit Care Med 168:1432-1437, 2003) is used to derive values for peripheral airways resistance. Twenty-four healthy volunteers, 21 severe asthmatics, 15 mild-to-moderate asthmatics, and 24 COPD patients were assessed with spirometry, impulse oscillometry, and fractionated exhaled nitric oxide. Compared to healthy volunteers, FE(NO) was higher in mild-to-moderate and severe asthmatics: geometric mean fold ratios of 1.91 (P = 0.02) and 2.74 (P < 0.001), respectively. However, there was no difference for mild-to-moderate versus severe asthma. Ratios for CA(NO) were not different for severe asthma versus COPD, but both were elevated compared to that of healthy volunteers [2.64 (P < 0.001) and 3.07 (P < 0.001), respectively] and mild-to-moderate asthma [1.95 (P = 0.04) and 2.28 (P < 0.01)]. However, after correction for axial diffusion, Corrected CA(NO) was increased in COPD compared to severe asthma (geometric mean fold ratio 1.28, P = 0.04), mild-to-moderate asthma (1.34, P < 0.01), and healthy volunteers (1.28, P = 0.02), and there was no difference between other groups. R5 and RF were reduced in healthy volunteers versus mild-to-moderate asthma (P = 0.011 and P < 0.001 respectively), severe asthma (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001), and COPD (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001). Peripheral resistance (R5-R20) was not different for healthy versus mild-to-moderate asthma but was higher in severe asthma (P < 0.001) and COPD (P < 0.001). Correlations were observed between R5-R20 versus FEF(25-75) (r = 0.71, P < 0.01), CA(NO) (r = 0.44, P < 0.01), and Corrected CA(NO) (r = 0.24, P < 0.01). CA(NO) and IOS provide additional information to traditional measures of spirometry and tidal nitric oxide. Previous data reporting elevated alveolar nitric oxide in severe asthma may reflect back-diffusion of nitric oxide from the conducting airways into the alveolar compartment. Corrected CA(NO) and IOS may prove to be useful noninvasive measurements of small-airways disease.

Relationship between fractional exhaled nitric oxide and nasal nitric oxide in airways disease.

BACKGROUND: Invasive techniques show evidence of a unified allergic airway. Nitric oxide is measured noninvasively from the lungs (fractional exhaled nitric oxide [FeNO]) and nose (nasal nitric oxide [nNO]). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between FeNO and nNO in different airway conditions. METHODS: A total of 227 participants were assessed: 41 healthy volunteers (HVs), 33 patients with asthma, 52 patients with allergic rhinitis (AR), 63 with unified airway disease (UAD), and 38 with nasal polyposis (NP). Correlation and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Geometric means (95% confidence intervals) for FeNO were as follows: 14.7 (12.4-17.5) ppb for HVs, 29.0 (22.5-37.4) ppb for asthma patients, 23.1 (19.0-28.1) for AR patients, 27.2 (23.0-32.4) for UAD patients, and 28.5 (21.5-37.8) for NP patients. For nNO, the values were as follows: 878.1 (807.0-955.6) ppb for HVs, 674.1 (557.4-815.1) for asthma patients, 853.3 (778.8-934.8) ppb for AR patients, 763.4 (694.1-839.5) for UAD patients, and 388.6 (317.9-474.9) for NP patients. The nNO was lower in the NP group than the other groups (P < .001). The nNO and FeNO were correlated in the AR patients (r = 0.56; P < .0001) and HVs (r = 0.44; P = .004) but not significantly in the other groups. Multiple linear regression of the whole cohort demonstrated that after diagnosis, age, sex, and inhaled corticosteroids were taken into account nNO had a significant association with FeNO (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Reduced nNO in NP patients is due to ostiomeatal complex obstruction. FeNO is sensitive to suppression by inhaled corticosteroids. The AR and HV groups have no such confounders; hence, correlation is most evident. Exclusion of confounders reveals a correlation between upper and lower airway inflammation with noninvasive techniques.

Systemic bioavailability of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) formulations of fluticasone/salmeterol in healthy volunteers via pMDI alone and spacer.

AIM: To compare a test version of HFA fluticasone/salmeterol (FP/SM) combination inhaler (Neolab, UK) with the reference product Seretide (GlaxoSmithKline, UK). METHODS: An in vitro Anderson cascade impactor was used to compare the fine particle dose (<4.7 microm). Two separate randomized cross-over studies were performed to compare the systemic bioavailability of test vs. reference (T vs. R) formulations of FP/SM 250/25 microg pMDI in healthy volunteers. In study 1 blood pharmacokinetic analysis using oral charcoal block was performed over 24 h following a single dose of four puffs via pMDI alone. In study 2 systemic bioactivity was measured following single doses of four and eight puffs via a spacer device: serum potassium (K(+)) to reflect SM, and overnight urinary cortisol : creatinine (OUCC) for FP. An early pharmacokinetic profile was also assessed over 120 min. RESULTS: The in vitro fine particle dose was similar for test vs. reference pMDI alone and via spacer. The results of both studies were consistent: No significant differences between formulations were seen in terms of FP kinetics. Analysis of SM kinetics revealed superiority of the test product. No significant dose-response or difference in T : R ratio was noted for OUCC. Fall in K(+) revealed a significant dose-response with a non-significant T : R ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The in vitro fine particle dose may not predict pharmacokinetic and systemic pharmacodynamic outcomes. Single dosing studies with fluticasone/salmeterol 250/25 microg via pMDI or with spacer showed pharmacokinetic equivalence with FP, but not SM. No significant difference between formulations was seen with either adrenal suppression or hypokalaemia.

Paradoxical trough effects of triple therapy with budesonide/formoterol and tiotropium bromide on pulmonary function outcomes in COPD.

BACKGROUND: Lowest receptor occupancy for a drug occurs at trough prior to the next dose. Previous studies have focused on the effects of triple therapy at peak dose intervals using forced expiratory maneuvers. Impulse oscillometry (IOS) and body plethysmography (PLETH) are more sensitive than spirometry to assess inhaled therapies in COPD. METHODS: Nineteen patients with COPD (FEV(1)/FVC ratio < 0.7; FEV(1) < 60%) completed a double-blind randomized crossover trial of tiotropium 18 microg/d or placebo for 2 weeks each, with a 1-week washout. Prior to this procedure, there was a nonrandomized 4 week run-in of budesonide/formoterol 200/6 2 puffs bid, which continued throughout the study. Spirometry, IOS, and PLETH were performed both before pre- and post-budesonide/formoterol run-in and at trough following the first and last dose of tiotropium (ie, 24 h posttiotropium and 12 h post-budesonide/formoterol). RESULTS: Mean +/- SEM for age and FEV(1) were 65 +/- 2 years and 42 +/- 2%, respectively. Following initial budesonide/formoterol, there were no significant changes in spirometry; however, all measures of IOS and PLETH deteriorated (P < .01 for all outcomes). Compared with placebo, tiotropium was additive to budesonide/formoterol after single and chronic dosing measured by FEV(1) (P < .001 and P = .014, respectively) and forced expiratory flow, midexpiratory phase (P = .001; P= .026), whereas specific airway resistance, reactance, resonant frequency, and area under the reactance curve showed additive benefits at a single dose only. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide/formoterol caused an unexpected worsening of IOS and PLETH outcomes compared with a washed-out baseline in the nonplacebo-controlled run-in. This finding was not observed with spirometry. Subsequent addition of tiotropium improved lung function with all techniques after a single dose and for spirometry after chronic dosing. These paradoxical findings may reflect beta2-adrenoceptor downregulation and muscarinic 3 receptor cross talk. Placebo-controlled studies are required to explore this result.

Fluticasone reverses oxymetazoline-induced tachyphylaxis of response and rebound congestion.

RATIONALE: Chronic use of intranasal decongestants, such as oxymetazoline, leads to tachyphylaxis of response and rebound congestion, caused by alpha-adrenoceptor mediated down-regulation and desensitization of response. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated if tachyphylaxis can be reversed by intranasal fluticasone propionate, and the relative alpha(1)- and alpha(2)-adrenoceptor components of tachyphylaxis using the alpha(1)-antagonist prazosin. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design, 19 healthy subjects received intranasal oxymetazoline, 200 microg three times a day for 14 days, followed by the addition of fluticasone, 200 microg twice a day for a further 3 days. At Days 1, 14, and 17, participants received a single dose of oral prazosin, 1 mg, or placebo with measurements made before and 2 hours later. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcomes evaluated were peak nasal inspiratory flow, nasal resistance, blood flow, and oxymetazoline dose-response curve (DRC). On Day 14 versus Day 1, inspiratory flow decreased (mean difference, 95% confidence interval) (-47.9 L x min(-1); -63.9 to -31.9; P < 0.001) and the DRC shifted downward (24.8 L x min(-1); 20.3-29.3; P < 0.001). On Day 17 versus Day 14, after fluticasone, inspiratory flow increased (45 L x min(-1); 30-61; P < 0.001) and the DRC shifted upward (26.2 L x min(-1); 21.7-30.7; P < 0.001). On Day 1, prazosin reduced inspiratory flow (-52.6 L x min(-1); -19.2 to -86) compared with baseline. This effect was abolished on Day 14 (7.9 L x in(-1); -41.3 to 25.5). CONCLUSIONS: Oxymetazoline-induced tachyphylaxis and rebound congestion are reversed by intranasal fluticasone. Further studies are indicated to evaluate if combination nasal sprays of decongestant and corticosteroid are an effective strategy to obviate tachyphylaxis and rebound in rhinitis. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00487032).

A novel breath-actuated integrated vortex spacer device increases relative lung bioavailability of fluticasone/salmeterol in combination.

BACKGROUND: Spacer devices facilitate respirable drug delivery. A novel breath-actuated antistatic spacer with integrated vortex chamber (Synchro-Breathe) device has been developed, which is compact,portable and user friendly as compared to conventional spacers which are bulky and cumbersome. The relative bioavailability to the lung of inhaled fluticasone and salmeterol combination is primarily dependent on respirable dose delivery and can be reliably quantified using adrenal suppression and early fall in serum potassium (marker of systemic beta-2 adrenoreceptor response) as surrogate markers for delivered lung dose. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the in vivo relative bioavailability to the lung of Hydrofluoroalkane(HFA) Seretide delivered via Synchro-Breathe (SB); an optimally prepared 750 ml large volume plastic spacer, Volumatic (VM); and conventional Evohaler pMDI (EH). METHODS: Nineteen healthy volunteers completed the study using a randomised double blind, double dummy crossover design. Single doses of placebo or Seretide HFA 250 (total dose ex-valve: fluticasone 2000 mcg/salmeterol 200 mcg) were administered via SB, VM and EH. Overnight urinary cortisol creatinine (OUCC) and serum potassium (K) were measured at baseline and after each dose as systemic surrogates of relative respirable dose delivery for the fluticasone and salmeterol moieties, respectively. RESULTS: Significant suppression of OUCC and K occurred from baseline with SB and VM but not EH devices(geometric mean fold suppression, 95% CI, p and arithmetic mean fall mmol/L, 95% CI, respectively); EH:1.51(0.43-1.01), p 1/4 0.06; VM: 2.52(1.57-4.04), p < 0.001; SB: 2.66(1.57-4.49), p < 0.001(equating to 33.8%,60.2% and 62.3% falls, respectively). For K, the falls for EH were 0.09(0.25 to 0.07), p 1/4 0.69; VM: 0.27(0.46 to 0.08), p 1/4 0.003; SB: 0.32(0.53 to 0.11), p 1/4 0.002 (equating to 2.2%, 6.8%, and 8.06% fall,respectively). There were no significant differences between SB and VM. CONCLUSION: The breath-actuated Synchro-Breathe device was comparable to an optimally prepared Volumatic spacer, and resulted in commensurate improvement in relative lung bioavailability for both fluticasone and salmeterol moieties compared to pMDI.