Formoterol added to low-dose budesonide has no additional antiinflammatory effect in asthmatic patients

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Adding inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists to a low dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) results in better asthma control than increasing the dose of ICSs. An important, but as yet unresolved, question is whether this is due to an additional reduction of airway inflammation. DESIGN: Double-blind, parallel-group trial. PATIENTS: Forty asthma patients (FEV1, 50 to 90% predicted; provocative concentration of a substance [methacholine] causing a 20% fall in FEV1 of < 8 mg/mL; no ICSs in the last 4 weeks). INTERVENTIONS: Randomization to 8 weeks of treatment with 100 microg of budesonide bid plus placebo (BUD200) or 100 microg of budesonide bid plus 12 microg of formoterol (BUD200 + F). Then the dose of budesonide (BUD) was increased to 400 microg bid in both groups for another 8 weeks. Bronchial biopsy specimens were collected before, and after 8 and 16 weeks of treatment. Eosinophils (major basic protein [MBP]) and mast cells (tryptase) were analyzed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: BUD200 reduced the MBP staining (p = 0.008) and tryptase staining (p = 0.048) in the epithelium compared to baseline levels. There were no significant differences between the BUD200 and BUD200 + F groups. In both groups, increasing the dosage of BUD to 800 microg had no significant additional antiinflammatory effect. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate that BUD administered at a low dose has significant antiinflammatory effects in patients with mild asthma. No significant additional antiinflammatory effects could be demonstrated either by adding formoterol or by increasing the dose of BUD.     

Additive bronchoprotective and bronchodilator effects with single doses of salmeterol and montelukast in asthmatic patients receiving inhaled corticosteroids

OBJECTIVE: We wished to evaluate whether the combination of a leukotriene receptor antagonist and long-acting beta(2)-agonist might confer additive beneficial effects in terms of bronchoprotection and bronchodilatation, in mild to moderate asthmatic patients who were suboptimally controlled on inhaled corticosteroids alone. METHODS: Twelve asthmatic patients were enrolled into a single-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, receiving additive therapy as either of the following: (1) montelukast alone, 10 mg (ML(10)); (2) inhaled salmeterol alone, 50 microg (SM(50)); (3) ML(10) and SM(50); (4) ML(10) and inhaled salmeterol, 100 microg (SM(100)); or (5) placebo inhaler and tablet. Trough measurements were made of adenosine monophosphate (AMP) bronchial challenge (the provocative concentration of a drug [AMP] causing a fall of >/= 20% in FEV(1) [PC(20)]) as the primary end point, and spirometry, following single doses of either placebo or active treatments (12 h after salmeterol, and 24 h after monteleukast, respectively). RESULTS: Compared to placebo, all active treatments led to significant improvements (p < 0.05) in geometric mean AMP-PC(20): placebo, 42 mg/mL; ML(10), 106 mg/mL; SM(50), 115 mg/mL; ML(10) and SM(50), 183 mg/mL; and ML(10) and SM(100), 247 mg/mL. The effects of montelukast and salmeterol were numerically additive, with ML(10) and SM(100) being significantly different (p < 0.05) from ML(10) alone. For mean FEV(1) and forced expiratory flow rate between 25% and 75% of vital capacity, there were significant differences (p < 0.05) between both combination therapies vs ML(10) alone. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest additive benefits of a single dose of a long-acting beta(2)-agonist and leukotriene antagonist, in terms of bronchoprotection and bronchodilation. Further studies in more severe asthmatics are required to evaluate long-term clinical effects.     

Formoterol mono- and combination therapy with tiotropium in patients with COPD: a 6-month study

Although guidelines recommend combining long-acting bronchodilators in COPD, data are limited. We examined the clinical efficacy and safety of formoterol, tiotropium and the combination in patients with COPD. Eight hundred and forty-seven patients with COPD (mean FEV(1) 52% predicted; FEV(1)/FVC 53%) were randomized to receive one of the following four treatments for 24 weeks: formoterol 10 microg b.i.d. plus tiotropium 18 microg o.d.; formoterol 10 microg b.i.d.; tiotropium 18 microg o.d., or placebo. The study was partially blinded (formoterol and placebo). For the primary endpoint, FEV(1) 2h post-dose after 24 weeks, there were small differences in favour of the combination therapy versus formoterol (0.07 L, p=0.044) or tiotropium (0.06 L, p=0.066). All three treatments were superior to placebo (p<0.001). The combination was statistically superior to monotherapy for: the primary endpoint (p=0.044 vs. formoterol); FEV(1) 5 min after the first dose (p<0.001) and at 12 weeks (p<0.05 vs. tiotropium); and peak expiratory flow averaged over the first 6 weeks (p<0.001 vs. both). The three active treatments were significantly more effective than placebo for secondary endpoints: COPD-related 'bad days', symptoms, use of rescue medication and peak expiratory flow, and aspects of health-related quality of life. The overall incidence of adverse events was similar with all active treatments, although COPD-related adverse events were more common with tiotropium. Combined bronchodilator therapy may be a valuable treatment option for patients with COPD.     

Difference in time-course of improvement in asthma control measures between budesonide and budesonide/formoterol

Combinations of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and inhaled long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABA) have become widely used for the initiation of maintenance treatment for asthma. However, it has not been fully elucidated whether ICS/LABA alters the time-course of different control outcome measures in steroid-naive patients with asthma compared to the treatment with ICS alone.We compared the time-response in Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), exhaled nitric oxide fraction (FE_NO), and airway responsiveness to methacholine (PD₂₀₀) between budesonide (BUD) and budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FM).BUD/FM therapy significantly improved the ACQ score at week 2 and week 4 (p < 0.01 and p < 0.05), and increased FEV1 and the methacholine threshold at week 8 and week 24 (all p < 0.05) compared to BUD alone. A logistic function model showed that the BUD/FM combination significantly improved ACQ, FEV1, FE_NO and PD₂₀₀ at a faster rate than BUD over 24 weeks (p < 0.001 for ACQ, FEV1, PD₂₀₀, and p < 0.05 for FE_NO, z-test). A significant variance in the time-response was also found in the outcomes of the two treatment groups (FE_NO and ACQ > FEV1 and PD₂₀₀, p < 0.001, z-test).The present study provides evidence that ICS/LABA combination therapy results in a more rapid improvement in asthma symptoms, lung function, and airway inflammation compared to ICS monotherapy in steroid-naive patients with asthma.     

Evaluation of salmeterol or montelukast as second-line therapy for asthma not controlled with inhaled corticosteroids

OBJECTIVE: To assess the addition of a leukotriene receptor antagonist and a long-acting beta(2)-agonist as second-line therapy in asthma. DESIGN: Placebo-controlled, double-dummy, crossover study. SETTING: Outpatient clinic. PATIENTS: Twenty patients with persistent asthma not controlled with inhaled corticosteroid therapy. INTERVENTIONS: Montelukast 10 mg once daily, or salmeterol, 50 microg bid, each for 2 weeks with 1-week run-in and washout placebo periods. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Adenosine monophosphate (AMP) bronchial challenge, blood eosinophil count (EOS), exhaled nitric oxide, and lung function after both placebo periods and after the first and last doses of each active treatment. Patients recorded their domiciliary peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms, and rescue bronchodilator requirement (RES) twice daily throughout the study. For the primary end point of the provocative concentration of AMP causing a 20% fall in FEV(1), compared to placebo (47.5 +/- 13.0 mg/mL), there were significant differences with the first (114.1 +/- 36.9 mg/mL) and last (94.2 +/- 30.4 mg/mL) doses of montelukast as well as the first (160.1 +/- 64.5 mg/mL) but not the last (70.1 +/- 23.7 mg/mL) dose of salmeterol. Only montelukast produced significant suppression of the EOS. Neither drug affected exhaled nitric oxide levels. There were significant improvements with the first doses of salmeterol for all parameters of lung function. After 2 weeks of treatment, there were significant improvements with both drugs for RES and morning PEF. There were no significant differences between drugs for any end points except EOS. CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast and salmeterol exhibited significant improvements in asthma control when given as second-line therapy. Montelukast also produced significant effects on AMP challenge and EOS suggesting anti-inflammatory activity.     

Long-term efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate powder administered once or twice daily via inhaler to patients with moderate asthma

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate administered as a once-daily or twice-daily regimen over a period of 1 year to patients with moderate asthma. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, parallel group, and placebo-controlled phase (12 weeks) and an open-label phase (54 weeks). SETTING: Multicenter study in an outpatient setting. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n = 253; age, > or = 12 years) with a mean FEV(1) of 67% predicted normal were stratified according to baseline therapy of maintenance inhaled corticosteroids vs beta(2)-agonists alone. MEASUREMENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Fluticasone propionate (250 microg bid or 500 microg qd) or placebo (bid) was administered via the Diskus multidose powder inhaler (Glaxo Wellcome; Research Triangle Park, NC) for 12 weeks. During open-label treatment, patients were re-randomized to once-daily or twice-daily fluticasone propionate. RESULTS: Compared to placebo, fluticasone propionate administered qd or bid significantly improved FEV(1) (p < 0.001), morning (p < 0.001) and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF; p < 0.001), asthma symptom scores (p < or = 0.001), and albuterol use (p 相似文献   

A pilot study to assess the effects of combining fluticasone propionate/salmeterol and tiotropium on the airflow obstruction of patients with severe-to-very severe COPD

The aim of this pilot study was to explore the relative efficacy in terms of improvement in symptoms and lung function of combining fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC) and tiotropium in patients with severe-to-very severe stable COPD. Ninety patients were randomized to receive 3 months of treatment in one of three treatment groups: (1) FSC 500/50 microg Diskus, 1 inhalation twice daily+placebo Handihaler 1 inhalation once-daily daily; (2) tiotropium 18 microg Handihaler, 1 inhalation once daily+placebo Diskus, 1 inhalation twice daily; (3) FSC 500/50 microg Diskus, 1 inhalation twice daily+tiotropium 18 microg Handihaler, 1 inhalation once-daily daily. Patients attended the clinic before and after 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months of treatment for evaluations of pulmonary function, and dyspnea, which was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS). Also the supplemental salbutamol use was measured. Eighty-one patients completed the 3-month treatment period: 26 patients receiving FSC, 26 patients receiving tiotropium, and 29 patients receiving FSC+tiotropium. Patients were withdrawn for COPD exacerbation. Improvements in trough FEV(1) with all treatments medications were observed by the first month when trough FEV(1) had improved significantly above baseline by 74 mL (p<0.05) in the tiotropium group, by 117 mL (p<0.05) in the FSC group and by 115 mL (p<0.05) in FSC+tiotropium group. At the end of the study, trough FEV(1) had improved significantly above baseline by 141 mL (p<0.05) in the tiotropium group, by 140 mL (p<0.05) in the FSC group and by 186 mL (p<0.05) in FSC+tiotropium group. The difference between FSC and tiotropium appeared to decrease, that between FSC and FSC+tiotropium appeared to increase and that between tiotropium and FSC+tiotropium remained almost similar with study duration. Our results suggest that adding FSC and tiotropium may provide benefits in symptomatic patients with severe-to-very severe stable COPD.     

The efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate (250 microg)/salmeterol (50 microg) combined in the Diskus inhaler for the treatment of COPD

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of the inhaled corticosteroid fluticasone propionate (FP) and the inhaled long-acting beta(2)-agonist salmeterol (SM), when administered together in a single device (Diskus; GlaxoSmithKline, Inc; Research Triangle Park, NC), with that of placebo and the individual agents alone in patients with COPD. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Seventy-six investigative sites in the United States. PATIENTS: Seven hundred twenty-three patients > or =40 years of age with COPD and a mean baseline FEV(1) of 42% predicted. INTERVENTIONS: FP (250 microg), SM (50 microg), FP plus SM combined in a single inhaler (FSC), or placebo administered twice daily through the Diskus device for 24 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: Primary efficacy measures were morning predose (ie, trough FEV(1)) for FSC compared with SM and 2-h postdose FEV(1) for FSC compared with FP. Other efficacy measures were as follows: morning peak expiratory flow rate (PEF); transition dyspnea index; chronic respiratory disease questionnaire; chronic bronchitis symptom questionnaire; exacerbations; and other symptomatic measures. RESULTS: At Endpoint (ie, the last on-treatment, post-baseline assessment), treatment with FSC significantly (p < or = 0.012) increased the morning predose FEV(1) (165 mL) compared with SM (91 mL) and placebo (1 mL), and significantly (p < or = 0.001) increased the 2-h postdose FEV(1) (281 mL) compared with FP (147 mL) and placebo (58 mL). Improvements in lung function with FSC compared with FP and SM, and with FP and SM compared with placebo, as measured by the average daily morning PEF, was observed within approximately 24 h after the initiation of treatment, indicating an early onset of effect (p < or = 0.034). Compared with placebo, FSC significantly improved dyspnea, quality of life, and symptoms of chronic bronchitis. The incidence of adverse effects (except for an increase in oral candidiasis with FSC and FP) were similar among the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with FSC (FP, 250 microg, and SM, 50 microg) twice daily substantially improved morning lung function and sustained these improvements for over a period of 24 weeks compared with FP or SM treatment alone in patients with COPD, with no additional safety concerns for the combination treatment vs that with the individual components.     

Long-term treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with salmeterol and the additive effect of ipratropium.

The efficacy and safety of salmeterol alone was compared with the combination of salmeterol plus ipratropium and with placebo during long-term treatment in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In addition, the single-dose effect in response to the first dose of treatment was studied over 12 h. The patients (n=144; age 64+/-7 yrs, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 44+/-11% pred) participated in a three-centre double-blind double-placebo parallel group study and were randomized after a run-in period of 2 weeks to receive either salmeterol 50 microg b.i.d., salmeterol 5 microg b.i.d. plus ipratropium 40 microg q.i.d. or placebo for a period of 12 weeks. The single-dose study demonstrated that salmeterol produced a significant increase in FEV1 (peak of 7% pred) and specific airway conductance (sGaw) (maximum of 60% baseline) for > or =12 h. The combination of salmeterol plus ipratropium elicited a greater bronchodilator response (11% and 94% increases respectively) than salmeterol alone during the first 6 h after inhalation. During treatment there were significant improvements in daytime symptom scores and morning peak expiratory flow in both the salmeterol and the salmeterol plus ipratropium groups (p<0.001), with an associated decrease in the use of rescue salbutamol. Improvements in FEV1 and sGaw were greater in the salmeterol plus ipratropium group than in the patients receiving only salmeterol. Thirty-five patients had an exacerbation; 11 (23%) in the salmeterol group (versus placebo NS), six (13%) in the salmeterol plus ipratropium group (versus placebo p<0.01) and 18 (36%) in the placebo group. In conclusion, in patients with severe stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, long-term treatment with either salmeterol alone or salmeterol plus ipratropium is safe and effective. There was added benefit from the combination therapy in terms of improvement in airways obstruction, but not for improvement in symptom control or need for rescue salbutamol.     

Budesonide/Formoterol Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhaler versus Budesonide: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Black Patients with Asthma

Objective. Concerns exist that responses to long-acting β₂-adrenergic agonists in black patients may differ from the general population. The efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FM) pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) versus budesonide dry powder inhaler (BUD DPI) were evaluated in adolescent and adult black asthma patients. Methods. This 12-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase IV US study was conducted in 311 self-reported black patients aged ≥12 years with moderate to severe persistent asthma, previously receiving medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroid. After 2 weeks on BUD 90 μg × 2 inhalations twice daily (bid), symptomatic patients were randomized to BUD/FM 160/4.5 μg × 2 inhalations bid or BUD 180 μg × 2 inhalations bid. Results. Improvement in predose forced expiratory volume in 1 second from baseline to the treatment mean (primary variable) was greater with BUD/FM versus BUD (0.16 vs. 0.07 L; p = .008); this effect was also observed at weeks 2, 6, and end of treatment (p ≤ .032). Greater improvements (p < .001) in peak expiratory flow with BUD/FM versus BUD were seen at first measurement and maintained during 12 weeks (morning: 25.34 vs. 7.53 L/minute, respectively; evening: 21.61 vs. 7.67 L/minute, respectively); greater improvements in daily asthma symptom score and rescue medication use were also observed (p ≤ .039). Both treatments were well tolerated, with similar safety profiles. Conclusions. In this population of black asthma patients, BUD/FM pMDI resulted in greater improvements in pulmonary function and asthma control versus BUD DPI, with similar safety profiles.     

A bolus of inhaled budesonide rapidly reverses airway subsensitivity and beta2-adrenoceptor down-regulation after regular inhaled formoterol

BACKGROUND: Subsensitivity of airway beta2-adrenoceptors develops readily in asthmatics receiving regular long-acting beta2-agonists. This subsensitivity may be rapidly reversed by using systemic corticosteroids. The purpose of the present study was to investigate whether the same acute facilitatory effects occur when using a bolus dose of inhaled corticosteroid. METHODS: Ten subjects with stable mild-to-moderate asthma, with a mean age of 27 years, mean (+/- SD) FEV1 of 2.95 L (0.94 L), 81% (15%) of predicted, all receiving inhaled corticosteroids, reactive to adenosine monophosphate (AMP) with a provocative concentration producing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) < 200 mg/mL, were recruited into a randomized double-blind crossover study. The subjects received two separate 1-week treatment periods with formoterol dry powder, 24 microg bid, with an initial 1-week run-in and a 1-week washout period between the treatments. A single dose of placebo or budesonide turbuhaler, 1,600 microg, was taken in conjunction with the last dose of both treatment periods. AMP challenge was performed 2 h after the first and last dose of formoterol. Blood for lymphocyte beta2-adrenoceptor density (Bmax) was also measured before and after treatment with formoterol. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the geometric mean PC20 after the first dose of formoterol comparing the two treatment periods: 362 mg/mL vs 391 mg/mL. The PC20 after the last dose of formoterol was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in conjunction with budesonide than with placebo: 427 mg/mL vs 99 mg/mL, amounting to a 4.3-fold difference (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 16.6). For comparison within each treatment period, there was significant subsensitivity (p < 0.05) between the first and last dose of formoterol when the latter was given with placebo: 391 mg/mL vs 99 mg/mL, a 3.9-fold fall (95% CI, 1.0 to 15.2), but not when the latter was given with budesonide: 362 mg/mL vs 427 mg/mL, a 1.2-fold rise (95% CI, 0.5 to 2.8). Lymphocyte 02-adrenoceptor density (geometric mean Bmax: fmol/10(6) cells) also showed significant down-regulation (p < 0.05) by formoterol given with placebo: preformoterol 2.53 vs postformoterol 1.91, but not by formoterol given with budesonide: preformoterol 2.43 vs postformoterol 2.67. The Bmax was significantly higher (p < 0.05) with formoterol + budesonide as compared to formoterol + placebo, amounting to a 1.40-fold difference (95% CI, 1.09 to 1.80). CONCLUSION: We have shown that a bolus dose of inhaled budesonide rapidly reverses subsensitivity to AMP bronchoprotection and associated beta2-adrenoceptor down-regulation in asthmatics taking regular formoterol. Further studies are indicated to assess whether high-dose inhaled corticosteroids should be administered as soon as possible along with beta2-agonists during an acute episode of bronchoconstriction.     

A long-term evaluation of once-daily inhaled tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Currently available inhaled bronchodilators used as therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) necessitate multiple daily dosing. The present study evaluates the long-term safety and efficacy of tiotropium, a new once-daily anticholinergic in COPD. Patients with stable COPD (age 65.2+/-8.7 yrs (mean+/-SD), n=921) were enrolled in two identical randomized double-blind placebo-controlled 1-yr studies. Patients inhaled tiotropium 18 microg or placebo (mean screening forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 1.01 versus 0.99 L, 39.1 and 38.1% of the predicted value) once daily as a dry powder. The primary spirometric outcome was trough FEV1 (i.e. FEV1 prior to dosing). Changes in dyspnoea were measured using the Transition Dyspnea Index, and health status with the disease-specific St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and the generic Short Form 36. Medication use and adverse events were recorded. Tiotropium provided significantly superior bronchodilation relative to placebo for trough FEV1 response (approximately 12% over baseline) (p<0.01) and mean response during the 3 h following dosing (approximately 22% over baseline) (p<0.001) over the 12-month period. Tiotropium recipients showed less dyspnoea (p<0.001), superior health status scores, and fewer COPD exacerbations and hospitalizations (p<0.05). Adverse events were comparable with placebo, except for dry mouth incidence (tiotropium 16.0% versus placebo 2.7%, p<0.05). Tiotropium is an effective, once-daily bronchodilator that reduces dyspnoea and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation frequency and improves health status. This suggests that tiotropium will make an important contribution to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease therapy.     

Regular inhaled salbutamol : effect on airway responsiveness to methacholine and adenosine 5'-monophosphate and tolerance to bronchoprotection

OBJECTIVE: Regular treatment with inhaled beta(2)-agonists increases airway responsiveness consistently to indirect bronchoconstrictors (allergen, exercise, hypertonic saline solution, etc) and inconsistently to direct bronchoconstrictors (histamine, methacholine). Studies demonstrating tolerance to beta(2)-agonist bronchoprotection against the indirect bronchoconstrictor adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) have not examined changes in baseline AMP responsiveness. This study assessed the effect of regular salbutamol on AMP and methacholine responsiveness and on tolerance to bronchoprotection. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, crossover study. SETTING: University hospital bronchoprovocation laboratory. PATIENTS: Fourteen atopic asthmatic subjects with FEV(1) > 65% predicted, and methacholine provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)) < 8 mg/mL. INTERVENTIONS: Salbutamol, 100 microg, and placebo inhalers, two puffs qid, each for 10 days. MEASUREMENTS: Methacholine PC(20) and AMP PC(20) measured 12 h after blinded inhaler after each treatment period. Methacholine PC(20) and AMP PC(20) repeated 10 min after salbutamol, 200 microg (eight subjects). RESULTS: There was no difference between placebo and salbutamol treatment in geometric mean methacholine PC(20) (0.85 mg/mL vs 0.82 mg/mL, p = 0.86) or AMP PC(20) (22 mg/mL vs 17.4 mg/mL, p = 0.21; n = 14). The acute bronchoprotective effect of salbutamol was greater vs. AMP than vs methacholine (5.1 doubling concentrations vs. 3.5 doubling concentrations, p = 0.06) and loss of protective effect of salbutamol (mean +/- SD) was greater vs AMP than vs. methacholine (2.4 +/- 0.33 doubling concentration loss vs 0.8 +/- 0.21 doubling concentration loss, p = 0.008; n = 8). CONCLUSION: Regular salbutamol (mean +/- SD) treatment did not enhance airway responsiveness to either the indirect bronchoconstrictor AMP or the direct bronchoconstrictor methacholine. Compared to its effect on methacholine, salbutamol had a greater acute protective effect vs AMP and produced greater loss of protection vs AMP when used regularly.     

Bronchodilating effect of combined therapy with ipratropium bromide and ondansetron in patients with COPD

The objectives of this study were to determine the effect of single and repeat dosing with oral ondansetron, a 5-HT3-specific receptor blocker, on the degree and duration of bronchodilation induced by inhaled ipratropium bromide in patients with COPD. Five clinics and university medical centers in four countries participated in the study; 47 patients with COPD were randomized to treatment; 44 completed all treatments. Patients had a baseline (pre-bronchodilator) FEV1>1L and post-bronchodilator (200 mcg salbutamol) FEV1<90% of predicted, with FEV1 reversibility (to 80 mcg inhaled ipratropium bromide and 400 mcg salbutamol) of at least 12% or 200 mL over baseline. The study was divided into two parts. In Part A, each patient received in a random order, four-way crossover manner, single doses of ondansetron placebo (oral) plus ipratropium bromide placebo (inhaled), ondansetron placebo plus ipratropium bromide 40 mcg inhaled via MDI, ondansetron 24 mg oral plus ipratropium bromide placebo and ondansetron 24 mg plus ipratropium bromide 40 mcg. In Part B, each patient received in a random order, two-way crossover manner, ipratropium bromide 40 mcg tid via MDI plus ondansetron 8 mg oral, qid, for 2 days; on day 3 patients received a single dose of ipratropium bromide 40 mcg plus 8 mg oral ondansetron. Alternatively, patients received ipratropium bromide via MDI and oral ondansetron placebo, as described above. Statistically significant differences in weighted mean FEV1 (0-6h), peak FEV1 and FEV1 determined 6h post-dose were noted comparing ipratropium bromide to placebo. Similar positive results were observed for sGaw and FVC. Addition of ondansetron to ipratropium bromide did not significantly modify values obtained with ipratropium alone. Ipratropium bromide induced a marked bronchodilation, compared to placebo. Addition of ondansetron (single or repeated doses) did not significantly increase the degree or duration of bronchodilation induced by ipratropium alone. sGaw was consistently more sensitive than FEV1 in measuring extent and duration of bronchodilation.     

Comparison of a combination of tiotropium plus formoterol to salmeterol plus fluticasone in moderate COPD

BACKGROUND: A 6-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted in patients with COPD to compare lung function improvements of tiotropium, 18 microg qd, plus formoterol, 12 microg bid, to salmeterol, 50 microg bid, plus fluticasone, 500 microg bid. METHODS: Following a screening visit, subjects entered a run-in period in which they received regular ipratropium. At randomization, patients were assigned to either tiotropium plus formoterol or salmeterol plus fluticasone. After 6 weeks of treatment, a 12-h lung function profile was obtained. The coprimary end points were FEV(1) area under the curve for the time period 0 to 12 h (AUC(0-12)) and peak FEV(1). RESULTS: A total of 729 patients were screened, and 605 patients were randomized and treated. A total of 592 patients (baseline FEV(1), 1.32 +/- 0.43 L/min [+/-SD]) were included in the analysis. After 6 weeks, the 12-h lung function profiles in the group receiving tiotropium plus formoterol were superior to those in the group receiving salmeterol plus fluticasone (mean difference in FEV(1) AUC(0-12), 78 mL [p = 0.0006]; mean difference in FVC AUC(0-12), 173 mL, p < 0.0001). Also, peak responses were in favor of tiotropium plus formoterol (difference in peak FEV(1), 103 mL [p < 0.0001]; difference in peak FVC, 214 mL [p < 0.0001]), as were FEV(1) and FVC at each individual time point after dose (p < 0.05). Predose FVC was significantly higher with the bronchodilator combination, while predose FEV(1) and rescue medication use did not differ significantly between groups. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Tiotropium plus formoterol was superior in lung function over the day compared to salmeterol plus fluticasone in patients with moderate COPD. Long-term studies in patients with severe COPD are warranted to assess the relative efficacy of different treatment combinations. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00239421.     

Ciclesonide is more effective than budesonide in the treatment of persistent asthma

BACKGROUND: Ciclesonide is a lung-activated inhaled corticosteroid that provides effective control of persistent asthma. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily ciclesonide versus once-daily budesonide in patients with asthma. METHODS: A total of 399 patients with asthma were randomised to receive once-daily ciclesonide 320 microg ex-actuator (equivalent to 400 microg ex-valve) or once-daily budesonide 400 microg for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV(1)). Additional efficacy variables included forced vital capacity (FVC), peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms, use of rescue medication and time to onset of effect. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: Both ciclesonide and budesonide significantly increased FEV(1) from baseline (416 and 321 ml, respectively; p<0.0001). The increase in FEV(1) was significantly greater in ciclesonide-treated patients (95% confidence interval: 0.016-0.174; p=0.019 versus budesonide). Similarly, ciclesonide and budesonide significantly improved FVC and PEF from baseline (p<0.0001), and significantly greater increases occurred with ciclesonide (p=0.034 and 0.019 versus budesonide, respectively). Analysis of morning PEF revealed an earlier onset of action for ciclesonide versus budesonide; a significant improvement was seen by day 2 (p=0.039 versus baseline) with ciclesonide compared with day 7 for budesonide (p=0.047 versus baseline). Adverse events occurred with a similar incidence in both treatment groups. Neither treatment caused significant changes in urinary cortisol levels. CONCLUSION: Once-daily ciclesonide was more effective than once-daily budesonide in improving FEV(1), FVC and PEF. Ciclesonide also had an earlier onset of action than budesonide in patients with persistent asthma. Both ciclesonide and budesonide had good safety and tolerability profiles.     

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler to budesonide Turbuhaler.

Mometasone furoate (MF) administered by dry powder inhaler (DPI) was composed with budesonide (BUD) Turbuhaler in the treatment of moderate persistent asthma. The patients were randomized to one of four treatment groups: MF DPI (100, 200, 400 microg b.i.d) or BUD Turbuhaler. 400 microg b.i.d in a 12-week, active-controlled, evaluator-blind, multicentre international trial. The primary efficacy variable was the mean change from baseline to endpoint (last treatment visit) in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). Changes in FEV1 showed a statistically significant superiority (p<0.05) of MF DPI 200 and 400 microg b.i.d compared with the BUD Turbuhaler 400 microg b.i.d treatment. Significant superiority (p<0.05) was also seen in scores for several secondary efficacy variables when MF DPI was compared with BUD Turbuhaler treatment. MF DPI 200 microg b.i.d was comparable to MF DPI 400 microg b.i.d in therapeutic benefit. The incidence of oral candidiasis was no more than 3% in any group. All treatments were well tolerated. A total daily dose of 400 microg of mometasone furoate administered by dry powder inhaler provides a well-tolerated treatment for patients with moderate persistent asthma and results in a significantly greater improvement, when compared to a daily dose of 800 microg BUD Turbuhaler in the parameters measured in this study.     

Once-daily budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler in adults with moderate persistent asthma

Patients with moderate persistent asthma (n = 523; mean FEV1 77.4%) not fully controlled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS; 400-1000 microg/day) were randomized to receive either once-daily budesonide/formoterol (160/4.5 microg, two inhalations); or twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (160/4.5 microg, one inhalation); or budesonide (400 microg) once-daily for 12 weeks. Once-daily dosing was administered in the evening and twice-daily dosing was administered in the morning and evening. All patients received twice-daily budesonide (200 microg) during a 2-week run-in. Compared with budesonide alone, change in mean morning and evening peak expiratory flow was greater in the once-daily budesonide/formoterol group (27 and 171 min(-1), respectively; P < 0.001) and twice-daily budesonide/formoterol group (23 and 24 l min(-1), respectively; P < 0.001). Night awakenings, symptom-free days, reliever-use-free days and asthma-control days were all improved during once-daily budesonide/formoterol therapy vs. budesonide (P < or = 0.05). Similar improvements were also seen with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (P < or = 0.05). The risk of a mild exacerbation was reduced after once- and twice-daily budesonide/formoterol vs. budesonide (38% and 35%, respectively; P < 0.002). All treatments were well tolerated. Budesonide/formoterol, once- or twice-daily, in a single inhaler improved asthma symptoms and exacerbations compared with budesonide. In the majority of patients with moderate persistent asthma requiring ICS and long-acting beta-agonists, once-daily formoterol/budesonide provided sustained efficacy over 24 h, similar to twice-daily dosing.     

Bronchodilator response to albuterol after regular formoterol and effects of acute corticosteroid administration

BACKGROUND: There is controversy about the development of bronchodilator subsensitivity after regular administration of long-acting beta(2)-agonists. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to evaluate whether regular treatment with formoterol affects the bronchodilator response to repeated puffs of albuterol, and also to assess the effects of acute administration of a bolus dose of IV or inhaled corticosteroid. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twelve patients (mean [SD] age, 43 [15] years; FEV(1), 57 [17] % predicted) with stable, moderate to severe persistent asthma who were all taking inhaled corticosteroids were evaluated in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover study. Patients received treatments each for 2 weeks followed by a bolus (IV/inhaled) of corticosteroid or placebo: (1) placebo inhaler bid + bolus placebo; (2) formoterol Turbuhaler 24 microg metered dosage bid (delivered dosage 18 microg bid) + placebo; (3) formoterol 24 microg bid + bolus IV hydrocortisone, 200 mg; or (4) formoterol 24 microg bid + bolus inhaled budesonide, 1,600 microg. Bronchodilator response to repeated puffs of albuterol (200 to 1,600 microg) for > 80 min was measured at 2 h after bolus administration of placebo or corticosteroid. The study was powered at the 80% level to detect a 20% difference in area under curve between 20 and 80 min (AUC) for FEV(1) response to albuterol as change from baseline (primary end point). RESULTS: There was significant subsensitivity (p = 0.01) of the mean albuterol FEV(1) response (as AUC, L x s) after formoterol alone (737) as compared to placebo (1,453) along with partial reversal by steroid administration: formoterol + hydrocortisone (1, 050), and formoterol + budesonide (942). There was a similar pattern of subsensitivity (p = 0.03) for the mean albuterol forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of vital capacity response (as AUC, L): placebo (2,149), formoterol alone (1,002), formoterol + hydrocortisone (1,402), and formoterol + budesonide (1,271). CONCLUSION: Regular treatment with formoterol produced significant bronchodilator subsensitivity to repeated puffs of albuterol, which was partially reversed by a bolus dose of systemic or inhaled corticosteroid.