Efficacy and safety of low-dose fluticasone propionate compared with zafirlukast in patients with persistent asthma.

To compare the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate and zafirlukast in patients with relatively stable persistent asthma who were previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids and short-acting beta(2)-agonists.A total of 440 patients (> or =12 years of age) previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids (beclomethasone dipropionate or triamcinolone acetonide) and short-acting beta(2)-agonists were included in this randomized double-blind study. After an 8-day run-in period, patients were treated with fluticasone (88 microg) or zafirlukast (20 mg) twice daily for 6 weeks. Outcome measures included pulmonary function (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)], peak expiratory flow [peak flow]), albuterol use, asthma symptoms, withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, and asthma exacerbations. Patients treated with fluticasone (n = 224) experienced greater mean increases in FEV(1) (0.24 L vs. 0.08 L, P <0.001), morning peak flow (30 L/min vs. 6 L/min, P <0.001), and evening peak flow (23 L/min vs. 5 L/min, P <0.001) during the study than did those treated with zafirlukast (n = 216). Fluticasone-treated patients had significantly greater increases in the mean percentages of symptom-free days (22% vs. 8%, P <0.001), rescue-free days (23% vs. 10%, P = 0.002), nights with uninterrupted sleep (<1% vs. -5%, P = 0.006), and fewer asthma exacerbations (1% vs. 6%, P = 0.005). Fewer fluticasone-treated patients were withdrawn due to lack of efficacy (2% vs. 13%, P <0.001).Inhaled fluticasone was more effective than zafirlukast in maintaining or improving asthma control in patients with relatively stable asthma who were switched from low-dose inhaled corticosteroids.

Intranasal fluticasone propionate is effective for perennial nonallergic rhinitis with or without eosinophilia.

BACKGROUND: Although response to intranasal corticosteroid therapy has been reported in patients with nonallergic rhinitis with eosinophilic syndrome (NARES), efficacy specifically in non-NARES patients has not been fully characterized. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of intranasal fluticasone propionate (FP) in the treatment of patients with perennial nonallergic rhinitis, with and without nasal eosinophilia. METHODS: Data from 983 patients in three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled PNAR trials were integrated. Patients received a total daily dose of FP 200 microg (n = 332), FP 400 microg (n = 325), or placebo (n = 326) for 28 days. Patients were > or =12 years of age with perennial rhinitis and negative skin tests to all allergens relevant to the geographic region. Nasal eosinophils were evaluated using a five-point scale. Patients were classified as non-NARES with a point score of 0 (n = 674; 69%); patients with a point score between I and 4 were classified as NARES (n = 309; 31%). Efficacy of FP was evaluated by the mean change in total nasal symptom score (TNSS), a sum of patient ratings of nasal obstruction, postnasal drip, and rhinorrhea. RESULTS: Patients with either NARES or non-NARES had similar statistically significant improvement with FP 200 microg or 400 microg compared with placebo; thus, the total group comprising both varieties of rhinitis responded to FP. In the total population, both FP treatment groups showed significantly greater improvement in TNSS compared with placebo during each week of treatment (P < or = 0.002), with mean changes in TNSS for day 22 to day 28 ranging from -84 and -85 in the FP 200 microg and FP 400 microg groups, respectively, to -64 in the placebo group. The three study treatment groups had similar proportions of non-NARES (68 to 69%) and NARES (31 to 32%) patients at baseline. In the non-NARES subgroup, mean changes in TNSS for each treatment group were similar to changes seen in the total population. In the NARES subgroup, mean changes in TNSS for the FP 200 microg and placebo groups were similar to changes seen in the total population; mean change in TNSS for the FP 400 microg group was somewhat greater than changes seen in the total population. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal FP is an effective treatment for perennial nonallergic rhinitis with or without nasal eosinophilia (NARES or non-NARES).

Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination compared with montelukast for the treatment of persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a chronic disease characterized by inflammation and bronchoconstriction. Medications that are able to effectively treat both components are advantageous. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of an inhaled corticosteroid and a long-acting beta2-agonist combination product with a leukotriene antagonist for initial maintenance therapy in patients who were symptomatic while receiving short-acting beta2-agonists alone. METHODS: A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter study was conducted in 432 patients 15 years of age and older with persistent asthma who were symptomatic on short-acting beta2-agonists alone. Fluticasone propionate 100 microg and salmeterol 50 microg combination product (FSC) twice daily or montelukast 10 mg once daily was administered. RESULTS: At endpoint, compared with montelukast, FSC significantly increased morning predose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (0.61 +/- 0.03 L vs 0.32 +/- 0.03 L), morning peak expiratory flow rate (peak expiratory flow rate; 81.4 +/- 5.9 L/minute vs 41.9 +/- 4.8 L/minute), evening peak expiratory flow rate (64.6 +/- 5.3 L/minute vs 38.8 +/- 4.7 L/minute), the percentage of symptom-free days (40.3 +/- 2.9% vs 27.0 +/- 2.7%), the percentage of rescue-free days (53.4 +/- 2.8% vs 26.7 +/- 2.5%), and the percentage of nights with no awakenings (29.8 +/- 2.5% vs 19.6 +/- 2.1%) (P < or = 0.011, all comparisons). At endpoint, FSC significantly reduced asthma symptom scores (-1.0 +/- 0.1 vs -0.7 +/- 0.1) and rescue albuterol use (-3.6 +/- 0.2 puffs/day vs -2.2 +/- 0.2 puffs/day) compared with montelukast (P < 0.001). At endpoint, patients treated with FSC also had a significantly greater improvement in quality of life scores and were more satisfied with their treatment compared with montelukast-treated patients (P < or = 0.001). Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Initial maintenance therapy with FSC provides greater improvement in asthma control and patient satisfaction than montelukast.