Formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 microg (delivered dose) has a rapid onset and 12-h duration of bronchodilation

Clinical trials show that formoterol (Oxis) Turbuhaler 4.5 microg delivered dose (6 microg metered dose) has a rapid onset of bronchodilation similar to that of salbutamol and a 12-h duration of action. Maximum increase in FEV(1) and duration of bronchodilation are dose-dependent, the 4.5 microg dose being the lowest dose tested giving both effects.Clinical studies investigating onset of bronchodilation show a significant increase in specific airway conductance occurring within 1 min after inhalation of formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 microg. When measured from 3-20 min after inhalation, formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 microg showed similar increases in FEV(1) to salbutamol administered via pMDI. No difference in onset of bronchodilation was observed between the formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 and 9 microg doses.Single-dose studies and studies of 1-12 weeks' duration show that formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 microg produces a significant and clinically important mean bronchodilating effect for > or =12 h after inhalation. In the cited studies no significant differences in duration of bronchodilation were observed between the formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 and 9 microg doses.Conclusion: clinical data show that formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 microg is an effective dose in patients with asthma, with a rapid onset of bronchodilation and a duration of at least 12 h.     

Safety of formoterol Turbuhaler at cumulative dose of 90 microg in patients with acute bronchial obstruction.

This study compared the safety of formoterol (Oxis Turbuhaler; 90 microg delivered dose; 120 microg metered dose) with terbutaline (Bricanyl Turbuhaler; 10 mg), in patients with acute bronchoconstriction. Forty-eight patients (31 females) with a mean age of 45 yrs, were randomized into two parallel groups (double-blind design). Mean baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was 0.98 L (33% of predicted normal). Study drugs were administered on six occasions during 3 h (formoterol 4.5 microg or terbutaline 0.5 mg x inhalation(-1), 20 inhalations). Patients received intravenous prednisolone after 1.5 h and oxygen during the first 3 h. Pulse rate, serum potassium, 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), Holter ECG, arterial blood gases and FEV1 were assessed during 12 h after the first dose. Four patients (one formoterol, three terbutaline) discontinued. The 12-h mean values of serum potassium decreased from 4.02 to 3.89 mmol x L(-1) for formoterol and from 4.22 to 3.76 mmol x L(-1) for terbutaline. Mean 12-h pulse rate was significantly (p<0.01) higher in the terbutaline group (101.7 beats per minute (bpm)) than in the formoterol group (93.5 bpm). No individual patient value was considered clinically important or alarming. FEV1 improved in both groups but with no statistically significant difference between treatments. Oxis Turbuhaler (90 microg) was at least as safe and well tolerated as terbutaline (10 mg) [corrected] in patients with acute bronchoconstriction.     

Efficacy and safety of formoterol delivered through the Novolizer, a novel dry powder inhaler (DPI) compared with a standard DPI in patients with moderate to severe asthma

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Because of environmental concerns CFC-containing pressurised metered dose inhalers (pMDI) had to be replaced by dry powder inhalers (DPI). The Novolizer, a novel DPI has previously been shown to be as effective as the Turbuhaler in delivering budesonide. The objective of this study was to show non-inferiority of inhaled formoterol therapy delivered through the Novolizer compared to formoterol delivered through the Aerolizer in patients suffering from moderate to severe asthma. METHODS: In this double-blind, double-dummy, multicentre study 392 patients were randomised and received a dose of 12 microg formoterol twice daily for 4 weeks either through the Aerolizer or the Novolizer. FEV1 after 4 weeks of treatment was the primary variable. Secondary variables were FVC, PEF, consumption of short-acting; 2 adrenoceptor agonists, asthma symptoms, tolerability and safety. RESULTS: After 4 weeks of treatment, the mean trough FEV1 (95% CI) was 2.34 L (2.24-2.45) for the Novolizer and 2.31 L (2.21-2.41) for the Aerolizer. Non-inferiority was proven (p<0.0001, pre-defined; of 0.25 L). All secondary variables (incl. PEF) confirmed these findings. Treatment with both devices was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Inhalation of 12 microg formoterol twice daily via Novolizer was shown to be equally therapeutically effective compared to the inhalation via Aerolizer in the treatment of moderate to severe persistent asthma. Treatment via both inhalers was safe and well tolerated.     

Clinically equivalent bronchodilatation achieved with formoterol delivered via Easyhaler and Aerolizer

BACKGROUND: User-friendly devices for the delivery of asthma drugs are needed to enhance treatment compliance. Formoterol inhalation powder has been developed to Easyhaler multidose powder inhaler to enable the treatment of all asthma severities with the same device. OBJECTIVES: This double-blind, double-dummy, single- dose, placebo-controlled, cross-over study aimed to demonstrate the non-inferiority of the bronchodilating effect of formoterol 12 microg delivered via Easyhaler versus via Aerolizer. In addition, dose responses following placebo, 12-microg and 48-microg doses of formoterol via Easyhaler were compared. Furthermore, onset and duration of action, and safety of formoterol inhaled using the two inhalers were compared. METHODS: Sixty-seven adult asthmatic subjects showing >or=15% increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) after short-acting sympathomimetic inhalation were enrolled and completed the study. The study comprised screening and 4 treatment days, with each subject inhaling a single 12-mug dose of formoterol via Easyhaler, a 12-microg dose via Aerolizer, a 48-microg dose via Easyhaler or placebo. Repeat spirometry and vital sign measurements were performed for 12 h during treatment days. The primary efficacy variable was the area under the flow volume curve (AUC(0-12)) of FEV(1). Secondary efficacy variables comprised maximum FEV(1 )(FEV(1max)), forced vital capacity (FVC), and the need of rescue medication during the treatment days. Safety was evaluated by determining blood pressure, heart rate and the number of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Results showed the non-inferiority of the bronchodilating effect of 12 microg formoterol via Easyhaler compared to Aerolizer. The Easyhaler-Aerolizer ratio for AUC(0-12) of FEV(1 )was 0.991 (95% confidence interval from 0.969 to 1.013). No statistically significant differences emerged for secondary efficacy variables. A statistically significant dose response was seen following placebo, 12- and 48-microg doses in FEV(1). No safety differences emerged for the 12-microg dose inhaled via Easyhaler or Aerolizer, but the incidence of AEs was higher following formoterol 48 microg and placebo treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Formoterol delivered via Easyhaler was therapeutically equivalent to Aerolizerat the 12-microg dose. The 48-microg dose via Easyhaler demonstrated statistically significantly greater bronchodilation but showed an increased occurrence of AEs.     

Onset of action of single doses of formoterol administered via Turbuhaler in patients with stable COPD

We studied 16 patients with stable COPD in a double blind, double dummy, placebo-controlled, within patient study to see if formoterol could be used as a rescue drug. We compared the of onset of bronchodilation obtained with formoterol 12 microg (metered dose corresponding to 9 microg delivered dose) and formoterol 24 microg (metered dose corresponding to 18 microg delivered dose), both delivered via Turbuhaler, with that of salbutamol 400 microg and salbutamol 800 microg delivered via pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI). Patients inhaled single doses of placebo, formoterol and salbutamol on five separate days. FEV1 was measured in baseline condition and 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, 24, 30, 40, 50, and 60 min after inhalation of each treatment. We examined two separate criteria for deciding if a response was greater than that expected by a random variation of the measurement: (1) a rise in FEV1 of at least 15% from the baseline value; (2) an absolute increase in FEV1 of at least 200 ml. Formoterol 12 microg (15.2 min; 95% CI 9.5-21.0) and formoterol 24 microg (15.1 min; 95% CI 8.9-21.2) caused a rise in FEV1 of at least 15% from the baseline value almost rapidly as salbutamol 400 microg (13.6 min; 95% CI 7.1-20.1) and salbutamol 800 microg (14.5 min; 95% CI 7.1-21.9). No significant difference (P=0.982) in onset of action was seen between the four active treatments. According to Criterion 2, the mean time to 200 ml increase in FEV1 was 11.1 min (95% CI: 7.0-15.2) after salbutamol 400 microg, 13.0 min (95% CI: 7.9-18.1) after salbutamol 800 microg, 14.7 min (95% CI: 7.1-22.4) after formoterol 12 microg, and 12.7 min (95% CI: 7.4-18.0) after formoterol 24 microg. Again, there was no significant difference (P= 0.817) between the four active treatments. Formoterol Turbuhaler 12 microg and 24 microg caused bronchodilation as rapidly as salbutamol 400 microg and 800 microg given via pMDI.     

Safety of formoterol after cumulative dosing via Easyhaler and Aerolizer

This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, cumulative dose, multicentre crossover study aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority in safety of formoterol delivered via Easyhaler versus Aerolizer. The secondary objective was to compare the efficacy of the devices. Thirty-three adult asthmatic subjects entered the study and 32 completed it. The study comprised screening and two study days, with each subject inhaling 96 microg (12, 12, 24 and 48 microg) cumulative dose of formoterol via the study inhalers. Serum potassium (S-K+), vital signs and spirometry were performed at baseline, 1h after each dose and additionally 4h after the last dose. The primary safety variable was S-K+. Secondary safety variables were heart rate, corrected QT interval, blood pressure, serum glucose and adverse events. Spirometry was assessed to evaluate efficacy. The results showed non-inferiority in safety of formoterol inhaled via Easyhaler compared to Aerolizer. The adjusted treatment difference in the S-K+ values after 96 microg cumulative dose of formoterol was 0.14 mmol/L being clearly above the pre-determined lower limit of the non-inferiority criterion of -0.2 mmol/L. There were dose-related changes in secondary efficacy variables after both treatments. The changes were comparable in most of the parameters but heart rate was statistically significantly higher and decrease in diastolic blood pressure greater after formoterol via Aerolizer than that via Easyhaler. The occurrence of adverse events was dose-related, the most common events being tremor, hypokalaemia, headache and palpitation. The spirometry results showed no statistically significant difference in efficacy between the treatments. In conclusion, formoterol delivered via Easyhaler was as safe as via Aerolizer.     

Relative therapeutic index between inhaled formoterol and salbutamol in asthma patients

A double-blind, randomized crossover study in 28 asthmatic patients assessed the relative therapeutic index for inhaled formoterol and salbutamol. Pre-drug administration FEV1 (mean 2.08 l) was 49-93% of predicted and reversibility 16-82% after inhalation of salbutamol. Patients inhaled single doses of formoterol (Oxis) (4.5,18 and 54 microg, delivered doses) via Turbuhaler, salbutamol (Ventolin) (200 and 1800 microg) via pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) and placebo at intervals of 48 h or more. Individual maximum FEV1 and minimum S-K+ were calculated. Relative local (maximum FEV1) and systemic (minimum S-K+) dose potencies, and their ratio, the relative therapeutic index, were estimated using a non-linear mixed effect model. The drug effects were well tolerated and dose dependent. A log-linear approximation was used to describe the bronchodilatory effect, whereas a sigmoid approximation was more apt to describe the decrease in serum potassium concentration. A bivariate dose-response model based on these principles was fitted simultaneously to all data. The mean relative therapeutic index between formoterol 4.5-54 microg given via Turbuhaler and salbutamol 200-1800 microg given via pMDI was estimated to be 2.5 in favour of formoterol; this trend was not statistically significant.     

The pulmonary and extra-pulmonary effects of high-dose formoterol in COPD: a comparison with salbutamol

OBJECTIVES: Formoterol, a beta(2) agonist with a rapid onset of effect and long duration of action, can be used as maintenance and reliever medication for asthma and COPD. We compared the pulmonary and extra-pulmonary effects of cumulative doses of formoterol and salbutamol in patients with COPD to assess efficacy and safety. METHODOLOGY: In a randomized, double-blind, cross-over study, 12 patients with moderate to severe COPD inhaled, via Turbuhaler, 10 doses of formoterol (total metered dose, 120 microg, equivalent to a 90- microg delivered dose), salbutamol (total metered dose 2000 microg) or placebo at 2-min intervals on separate days. The effects on lung function (FEV(1) and PEF), heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, corrected QT interval (QTc), T-wave height and plasma potassium were assessed before each dose, 15 min after each dose, and at half-hourly intervals for 3 h following the final dose. RESULTS: Inhalation of formoterol or salbutamol resulted in significant improvement in lung function (measured 30 min after the last dose) when compared with placebo. There were no clinically important or statistically significant changes in heart rate, QTc, T-wave height, plasma potassium, oxygen saturation, or systolic and diastolic blood pressures with formoterol or salbutamol. One patient developed ventricular trigeminy after both formoterol and salbutamol. She had had ventricular ectopics on her screening electrocardiogram. CONCLUSION: Formoterol and salbutamol both produced significant improvement in lung function and were similarly well tolerated in high doses, as might be taken by a patient for relief of COPD symptoms.     

Bronchodilator response to formoterol Turbuhaler in patients with COPD under regular treatment with formoterol Turbuhaler

Formoterol Turbuhaler has been suggested for as-needed use in asthmatic patients. We investigated whether regular treatment with formoterol would modify the dose-response curves to formoterol in patients with partially reversible COPD. In this randomised, double-blind, cross-over study taking place over four non-consecutive days 16 outpatients with moderate to severe COPD, who were under regular treatment with formoterol Turbuhaler (18 microg in two daily doses) from at least 4 months, inhaled a conventional dose of formoterol Turbuhaler 9 microg or placebo. Two hours later, a FEV(1) value was established, following which a dose-response curve to formoterol (4.5 microg/inhalation) or placebo was constructed using four inhalations (1+1+2)--total cumulative delivered dose of 18 microg formoterol--with the following sequences: (1) formoterol pre-treatment + formoterol 18 microg, (2) formoterol pre-treatment + placebo, (3) placebo pre-treatment + formoterol 18 microg, (4) placebo pre-treatment + placebo. Formoterol 9 microg induced significant (P < 0.0001) bronchodilation at 2 h after inhalation (best mean increase in FEV(1): 0.170 L). Afterwards, dose-dependent increases in FEV(1) occurred with formoterol (maximum mean increase from 2-h value with formoterol: 0.072 after formoterol pre-treatment, and 0.201 L after placebo pre-treatment). Both maximum values of bronchodilation after the last inhalation of formoterol were statistically different (P < 0.001) from 2-h levels. These results show that dose-dependent bronchodilatation of formoterol is maintained despite regular treatment.     

Formoterol Turbuhaler as reliever medication in patients with acute asthma.

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of formoterol versus salbutamol as reliever medication in patients presenting at an emergency dept with acute asthma. A randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study was performed in four Australian emergency treatment centres. The study included a total of 78 adult patients (mean baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 1.83 L; 59% predicted) with acute asthma. Based on the expected dose equivalence of formoterol Turbuhaler 4.5 microg (delivered dose) and salbutamol pressurised metered-dose inhaler 200 microg (metered dose), patients received a total of formoterol Turbuhaler 36 microg (delivered) or salbutamol pressurised metered-dose inhaler with spacer 1,600 microg (metered), divided into two equal doses at 0 and 30 min. FEV1, peak expiratory flow and systemic beta2-agonist effects were monitored for 4 h. The primary variable was FEV1% pred at 45 min. At 45 min, mean increases in FEV1 expressed in % pred were 6.6% and 9.3%, respectively, with a small adjusted mean difference in favour of salbutamol (3.0%, 95% confidence interval -2.0-8.0). Transient increases in systemic beta2-agonist effects occurred predominantly with salbutamol, although no significant treatment differences were observed. Eight patients discontinued due to adverse events. In this study of patients presenting at emergency depts with acute asthma, formoterol Turbuhaler 36 microg was well tolerated and, as rescue therapy, had an efficacy that was not different from that of salbutamol pressurised metered-dose inhaler with spacer 1,600 microg in the number of patients studied.     

Comparable efficacy and tolerability of formoterol (Foradil) administered via a novel multi-dose dry powder inhaler (Certihaler) or the Aerolizer dry powder inhaler in patients with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND: For maximum treatment compliance there is a need to provide asthma patients with devices that suit their particular preferences. The Foradil Certihaler is a novel multi-dose dry powder inhaler developed to increase the choice of devices available. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of formoterol administered via the Foradil Certihaler, or via the single-dose inhaler Foradil Aerolizer. METHODS: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, incomplete block crossover, dose-ranging and pharmacokinetic study in patients with persistent asthma. Sixty-seven patients (mean 48.0 years) were randomized to formoterol 5, 10, 15 and 30 microg twice daily via the Certihaler, 12 microg formoterol b.i.d. via the Aerolizer, or placebo in four 1-week double-blind treatment periods separated by 1-week single-blind washouts. RESULTS All formoterol doses delivered via the Certihaler or the Aerolizer significantly increased FEV(1) compared with placebo (p < 0.0001). Formoterol demonstrated an onset of action of <3 min. All active treatments were well tolerated. Tremor was the most common adverse event and was more pronounced at high doses. At lower doses the incidence of tremor with the Certihaler was similar to that observed with placebo or the Aerolizer. The pharmacokinetic evaluation comprised 41 patients (mean 45.9 years). Urinary excretion of unchanged formoterol and total formoterol increased with dose delivered via the Certihaler. The optimum dose of formoterol via the Certihaler was 10 microg. Conclusion: Delivery of formoterol via the Certihaler or Aerolizer combines rapid relief with enduring control and provides convenient bronchodilation in patients with persistent asthma.     

Tolerability of a high dose of budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler in patients with asthma

This randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover, placebo-controlled study assessed the acute tolerability of budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler (Symbicort Turbuhaler, AstraZeneca) administered as a high dose. Fourteen patients with asthma receiving budesonide/formoterol maintenance treatment (two inhalations of 160/4.5 microg twice daily) inhaled 10 additional doses of budesonide/formoterol 1600/45 microg (total daily dose including morning dose of maintenance treatment 1920/54 microg) or formoterol 45 microg (Oxis Turbuhaler, AstraZeneca; total daily dose including morning dose of maintenance treatment 54 microg formoterol) or placebo in addition to the morning dose of maintenance treatment on 3 separate study days. Serum potassium, pulse rate, blood pressure and ECG were assessed at regular intervals over a 12-h period following dosing. Blood glucose and plasma lactate were assessed over 3 h following dosing. Changes in serum potassium, pulse rate, blood pressure, QTc, blood glucose and plasma lactate occurring with budesonide/formoterol, though statistically significantly different from placebo (P<0.05), were considered clinically unimportant. No clinically relevant differences were identified between active treatments. In conclusion, budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler is well tolerated at high doses such as might be used by patients using budesonide/formoterol for relief of symptoms of asthma.     

Safety and tolerability of high-dose formoterol (via Aerolizer) and salbutamol in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

To evaluate the safety and tolerability of high-dose formoterol and salbutamol in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In this two-way crossover, double-blind, double-dummy study, 17 adults with mild-to-moderate COPD were randomized to receive either formoterol 24 microg (2 x 12 microg via Aerolizer), or salbutamol 600 microg (6 x 100 microg via metered-dose inhaler), and the appropriate double-dummy q.i.d. at 4-h intervals for 3 consecutive days (total daily dose: 96 and 2400 microg, respectively). After a 4-7-day washout period, patients were switched to the other treatment. Treatment with high-dose formoterol and salbutamol was equally well tolerated, with no reports of serious adverse events. Both agents were associated with decreased plasma potassium (mean minimum values: 3.4 and 3.3 mmol/l for formoterol and salbutamol, respectively; P=0.914), increased serum glucose (mean maximum values: 9.0 and 8.7 mmol/l, respectively; P=0.373), and small increases in mean QTc interval (mean maximum 439 ms with both treatments; P=0.813). No clinically relevant between-treatment differences in adverse events or laboratory values occurred. Both drugs improved lung function (mean maximum forced expiratory volume in 1s [FEV(1)] 2.6 l with both treatments; P=0.624), with the improvement being significantly greater with formoterol than with salbutamol on all 3 days of treatment (mean area under the curve [AUC](0-24 h) of FEV(1) formoterol vs. salbutamol on days 1-3, all P<0.05). High-dose formoterol via Aerolizer (up to 96 microg/day) has a comparable tolerability profile to that of salbutamol in patients with mild-to-moderate COPD.     

Beclomethasone/formoterol versus budesonide/formoterol combination therapy in asthma.

The present study was designed to compare the fixed combination of beclomethasone and formoterol in a hydrofluoroalkane Modulite (Chiesi Farmaceutici, Parma, Italy) pressurised metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), with a combination of budesonide and formoterol administered via a Turbuhaler (AstraZeneca, Lund, Sweden) dry powder inhaler (DPI). This was a phase III, multinational, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, two-arm parallel groups, controlled study design. After a 2-week run-in period, 219 patients with moderate-to-severe asthma were randomised to a 12-week treatment with beclomethasone 200 microg plus formoterol 12 microg b.i.d. delivered via a pMDI or budesonide 400 microg plus formoterol 12 microg b.i.d. delivered via a DPI. The analysis of noninferiority on primary outcome, morning peak expiratory flow in the last 2 weeks of treatment, showed no difference between groups. A statistically significant improvement from baseline in lung function, symptoms and rescue medication use was observed in both groups at all time-points. No differences were observed between treatments in either rate of asthma exacerbations or frequency of adverse events. The new fixed combination of beclomethasone and formoterol in hydrofluoroalkane Modulite pressurised metered-dose inhaler is equivalent to the marketed combination of budesonide and formoterol in terms of efficacy and tolerability profile.     

One-year safety and efficacy of budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler (Symbicort Turbuhaler) for the treatment of asthma

BACKGROUND: A budesonide/formoterol single inhaler has been developed for convenient treatment of patients whose asthma is inadequately controlled by inhaled glucocorticosteroids alone. OBJECTIVES: To compare long-term safety and efficacy of budesonide/formoterol single inhaler with budesonide plus formoterol via separate inhalers in adults with asthma. METHODS: In this open, randomized, parallel-group 6-month extension conducted in a subset of centres from a previous 6-month study, patients (n=321) received two inhalations bid of budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) 160/4.5 microg delivered dose or corresponding doses of budesonide (Pulmicort Turbuhaler) plus formoterol (Oxis Turbuhaler) via separate inhalers. RESULTS: Significantly fewer patients receiving budesonide/formoterol single inhaler withdrew compared with budesonide plus formoterol (9 vs. 19%, P=0.008). Incidence and severity of AEs were low and similar in both groups. No clinically important differences between groups, or changes, were identified in laboratory measurements, vital signs or ECG. Treatments produced similar improvements in lung function, ACQ scores and Mini AQLQ domains that were maintained throughout 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler is as safe and effective in the long-term treatment of asthma as budesonide plus formoterol via separate inhalers. The lower number of withdrawals with budesonide/formoterol may reflect better adherence to treatment compared with budesonide plus formoterol.     

Onset and duration of action of formoterol and tiotropium in patients with moderate to severe COPD

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management guidelines recommend regular treatment with one or more long-acting bronchodilators for patients with moderate to severe COPD. OBJECTIVE: To compare the onset and duration of action of formoterol and tiotropium in patients with COPD. METHODS: This randomized, multicentre, open-label crossover study in 38 patients with COPD (mean age 64 years; mean FEV(1) 55% predicted) assessed the effect of 7 days of treatment with formoterol (12 microg b.i.d. via Foradil Aerolizer) vs. tiotropium (18 microg o.d. via Spiriva HandiHaler) on lung function measured over a period of 12 h after the first dose on day 1 and the last dose on day 8. RESULTS: The primary efficacy variable, FEV(1)-AUC during the first 2 h post-dose (FEV(1)-AUC(10-120 min)), was significantly higher for formoterol compared with tiotropium, with between-treatment differences of 124 ml (p = 0.016) after the first dose and 80 ml (p = 0.036) after 7 days' treatment in favour of formoterol. FEV(1) measured 12 h after inhalation did not differ statistically significantly between treatments. Adverse events occurred in 2 (5%) patients after treatment with formoterol and in 5 (12%) patients after treatment with tiotropium. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates faster onset of action and greater bronchodilation of formoterol vs. tiotropium for bronchodilation within the first 2 h of inhalation (FEV(1)-AUC(10-120 min)) and comparable bronchodilation 12 h post-inhalation in patients with moderate to severe COPD.     

Effects of formoterol and ipratropium bromide in COPD: a 3-month placebo-controlled study.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of formoterol, ipratropium bromide and a placebo on walking distance, lung function, symptoms and quality of life (QoL) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. A total of 183 patients (mean age 64 yrs, 86 female) with moderate-to-severe nonreversible COPD participated in this randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study. After a 2-week placebo run-in, patients were randomised to formoterol Turbuhaler 18 microg b.i.d. (delivered dose), ipratropium bromide 80 microg t.i.d. via a pressurised metered dose inhaler, or placebo for 12 weeks. Inhaled short-acting beta2-agonists were allowed as relief medication and inhaled glucocorticosteroids were allowed at a constant dose. The primary variable was walking distance in the shuttle walking test (SWT). Baseline mean SWT distance was 325 m, mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was 40% predicted. Clinically significant improvements in SWT (>30 m) were seen in 41, 38 and 30% of formoterol, ipratropium and placebo patients, respectively (not significant). Mean increases from run-in were 19, 17 and 5 m in the formoterol, ipratropium and placebo groups, respectively. Both active treatments significantly improved FEV1, forced vital capacity, peak expiratory flow and daytime dyspnoea score compared with placebo. Formoterol reduced relief medication use compared with placebo. Neither active treatment improved QoL. Formoterol and ipratropium improved airway function and symptoms, without significant improvements in the shuttle walking test.     

The 24 h duration of bronchodilator action of the budesonide/formoterol combination inhaler

INTRODUCTION: The duration of bronchodilator action of the long-acting beta-agonist formoterol when administered in the evening has not been investigated. In this study we have investigated whether a single evening dose of formoterol, administered from the combination budesonide/formoterol (BUD/F) Turbuhaler significantly attenuates the circadian rhythm in airway tone over 24 h. METHODS: Twenty subjects with mild to moderate asthma (mean FEV1 84% predicted) participated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study. Subjects inhaled, in random order, placebo or BUD/F (2x100/6 microg) administered in the evening (2000 h) on two separate occasions. Lung function measurements including FEV1, specific airways conductance (sGaw) and maximum expiratory flow at 25-75% of vital capacity (MEF(25-75%)) were assessed at baseline, at 1 h and subsequently every 4 h post-dose for 24 h. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, BUD/F significantly improved the three measures of airways function throughout the 24 h period, with a difference in FEV1 at 24 h of 0.20L (0.04-0.35L). BUD/F attenuated the biphasic pattern of the circadian rhythm in airway tone. CONCLUSION: The single evening administration of formoterol from the combination BUD/F inhaler resulted in a duration of bronchodilation of at least 24 h.     

Efficacy of formoterol Turbuhaler in the emergency treatment of patients with obstructive airway diseases

Dry powder devices are rarely used in the emergency room (ER) treatment of acute and severe bronchoconstriction due to hesitations with respect to clinical efficacy. This study investigated the effects of two inhalers with formoterol in patients visiting the ER Department for acute and severe dyspnoea, mainly exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Two doses of 12mug formoterol were given at enrolment, either via Turbuhaler or via pressurised metered dose inhaler, connected to a spacer device (pMDI+S) in a double-blind way and parallel design. Another two doses of 12 microg formoterol were given after 30 min. Forced expiratory volume in the 1s (FEV(1)) and Borg dyspnoea score were assessed until 60 min. The study was designed to test non-inferiority in effects on FEV(1). Seventy-seven patients were enrolled with a mean age of 66 years and a FEV(1) of 1.03 L (39% of predicted). The effects of the two treatments were almost identical. The mean improvement in FEV(1) at 60 min after formoterol Turbuhaler was 94% of the improvement after formoterol pMDI+S. A statistically significant non-inferiority was shown (p=0.037) at 60 min (primary endpoint) as well as at 5 and 30 min (secondary endpoints, p=0.0043 and 0.013, respectively). Improvements in the Borg dyspnoea score and other lung-function parameters did not differ significantly between the two devices. In conclusion, formoterol Turbuhaler was equally effective as formoterol pMDI+S in the treatment of acute bronchoconstriction within the ER.     

Oxis (formoterol given by Turbuhaler) showed as rapid an onset of action as salbutamol given by a pMDI

Thirty-six adult patients (16 women) with mild to moderate asthma with a mean baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) of 73.8% (46-106%) of predicted normal value and mean reversibility of 24.2% (14.6-47.1%) were included in this double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, placebo-controlled and cross-over study. The patients inhaled single doses 4.5 or 9 microg of formoterol (Oxis) via Turbuhaler salbutamol (Ventolin) 100 or 200 microg from a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) or placebo at five randomized visits. Efficacy was measured by FEV1 pre-dose and then 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, 20, 25 and 30 min after inhalation of the study drug. The primary variable of efficacy was the FEV1-value 3 min after dose intake. No statistically significant differences were found between active treatments. All active treatments gave a higher bronchodilating effect at 3 min than placebo: 10.0, 11.4% for salbutamol 100 and 200 microg and 11.7, 11.8% for formoterol 4.5 and 9 microg (P<0.001 in all cases). There was a correlation between the measured response at 3 min and the subjective experience of the patients. The relative difference vs. placebo remained throughout the study period for all active treatments except for low dose salbutamol. All treatments were well tolerated. In conclusion, formoterol Turbuhaler has as rapid an onset of action as salbutamol pMDI when given at recommended doses.