Albuterol HFA is as effective as albuterol CFC in preventing exercise-induced bronchoconstriction.

BACKGROUND: Secondary to the phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the albuterol (Ventolin, GlaxoSmithKline, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom) pressurized metered-dose inhaler (MDI) has been formulated in a non-ozone-depleting propellant, hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) 134a. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of albuterol HFA to albuterol CFC and placebo HFA in protecting patients from exercise-induced bronchospasm (EIB). METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover study in patients with documented EIB. Patients (n = 24) aged 18 to 45 years old received albuterol HFA or albuterol CFC, (total dose of 180 microg ex-actuator), or placebo HFA via an MDI, 30 minutes before a standardized exercise challenge. Serial forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) measurements were made 5 minutes before exercise and 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and 60 minutes postexercise. The primary outcome measure was the maximum percentage fall in FEV1 over the 60 minutes after exercise. RESULTS: The adjusted mean maximum percentage falls in FEV1 postexercise for albuterol HFA and CFC groups were 15.4% and 14.9%, respectively. The two formulations were comparable with a treatment difference of -0.5% (P = 0.848; 95% confidence interval, -5.3 to 4.4%). When compared with the fall in FEV1 for placebo (33.7%), both active treatments demonstrated a significantly smaller fall in FEV1 postexercise (P < 0.001). Safety profiles were similar among the three treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide assurance to prescribers that the formulation of albuterol in the non-ozone-depleting propellant HFA 134a has not affected its efficacy in the treatment of EIB in asthmatic patients. Single doses of albuterol HFA and CFC from an MDI are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety on a microgram per microgram basis.

A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of single doses of HFA 134a albuterol and CFC albuterol in mild-to-moderate asthmatic patients.

BACKGROUND: After the signing of the Montreal Protocol in 1987, new propellants for use in pressurized metered-dose inhalers that are non-ozone-depleting have been developed. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of single doses of albuterol/HFA 134a with albuterol/CFC and to demonstrate a dose-response among the different doses of both formulations. METHODS: A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study. Sixty-three adolescent and adult asthmatic patients were randomized to receive at separate treatment visits single doses via a pressurized metered-dose inhaler of either placebo/hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) 134a; 100 microg, 200 microg, or 400 microg albuterol/HFA 134a; 100 microg or 200 microg albuterol/chlorofluorocarbon (CFC). Triplicate measurements of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) were made immediately before dosing and 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 hours postdose. The primary efficacy variables were area under the entire 6-hour FEV1 curve, relative to baseline subtracted from the area above baseline (AUC(0-6)) and peak effect (derived from serial FEV1 measurements). RESULTS: Analysis of AUC(0-6) and peak effect showed that all doses of albuterol had a significantly greater effect than placebo (HFA 134a propellant). Comparisons of the two formulations at 100 microg and 200 microg showed no difference in AUC(0-6) (100 microg, -0.23 Lhr, P = 0.114 and 200 microg -0.08 Lhr, P = 0.590) or in peak effect, percentage of baseline (100 microg, -1.3%, P = 0.354 and 200 microg, 0.17%, P = 0.902). There were no differences seen among formulations in the incidence of adverse events or with any of the other safety parameters, including electrocardiograms, vital signs, clinical laboratory assessments, and asthma exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated comparability in terms of efficacy and safety between albuterol/HFA 134a and albuterol/CFC.