Improving asthma control in patients suboptimally controlled on inhaled steroids and long-acting β2‐agonists: addition of montelukast in an open-label pilot study

ABSTRACT

Background: Airway inflammation and symptoms often persist in asthma patients despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β₂-agonists (LABA). It is hypothesized that the leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast, treating a pathway of inflammation distinct from that of ICS, might confer additional benefit.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of montelukast in improving asthma control in patients symptomatic on a fixed-association (FA) medium dose of ICS and LABA.

Methods: A 2-month, open-label, real-life observational study was undertaken by 131 Belgian pulmonologists. Patients (≥ 15 years old) suffering from persistent asthma (pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ ≥ 60% of predicted value) and insufficiently controlled on a FA therapy of fluticasone/salmeterol or budesonide/formoterol were given montelukast 10?mg daily as add-on therapy. Asthma control was assessed by the standardized Juniper asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) at baseline and after a 2-month treatment with montelukast. Global evaluation of therapy was made both by the patients and physicians.

Results: A total of 313 patients were eligible for analysis. Forty-nine per cent received inhaled fluticasone/salmeterol and the rest budesonide/formoterol. Mean ACQ score decreased significantly on montelukast (13.9 ± 5.1 at baseline versus 7.4 ± 4.7 on montelukast, p < 0.001), with a significant improvement in all individual symptom scores (?p < 0.001) and in pre-bronchodilator FEV₁ score (from 2.2 ± 1.5 to 1.6 ± 1.4; p < 0.001). Parallel to these results, 78.6% of the patients reported a global improvement of their asthma. The same proportion of improvement was observed in the global evaluation made by the physicians (κ = 0.66).

Conclusion: This pilot study suggests that addition of montelukast in patients symptomatic on a FA of ICS and LABA may result in significant improvements in asthma control. A randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial seems warranted.     

Efficacy of add-on montelukast in patients with non-controlled asthma: a Belgian open-label study*

ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of add-on montelukast on asthma control and allergic rhinitis symptoms in asthmatic patients still symptomatic with chronic treatment with inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β₂ agonist (ICS/LABA), irrespective of the dose.

Research design and methods: This 2-month, open-label, real-life, multicentre, observational study was undertaken by 499 general practitioners in Belgium. Patients (≥?4?years old) with uncontrolled asthma despite fluticasone/salmeterol or budesonide/formoterol therapy had oral montelukast 4, 5, or 10?mg daily added to their therapy, depending on the registered dose for their age. Asthma control, assessed by the 6-item Juniper Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ) was recorded at baseline and after 2?months of treatment with montelukast and the patients’ global evaluation of asthma was also recorded at the end of the study. Concomitant allergic rhinitis symptoms were evaluated according to the patients’ perception.

Results: A total of 5769 patients were eligible for analysis. Addition of montelukast was associated with significant decrease in mean (SD) ACQ score (from 1.97 [0.77] at baseline to 1.05 [0.69] after add-on treatment, p?<?0.001). There was also a significant improvement in all individual symptoms of the ACQ score (p?<?0.001). After 2?months, 89% of the patients reported global improvement of their asthma, with a good correlation between patients’ global evaluation and change in ACQ scores. Of the 2442 patients who reported allergic rhinitis symptoms at baseline, 91% showed a global improvement of their asthma symptoms and 82% in their rhinitis symptoms after adding montelukast.

Conclusion: This open-label observational study showed an improvement, after 2?months of add-on therapy with montelukast, in both asthma and allergic rhinitis symptoms in patients not adequately controlled on a fixed association of ICS/LABA.     

Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy: a new treatment approach for adult patients with asthma

ABSTRACT

Background: An inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or an ICS/long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) combination plus short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) as needed for symptom relief is recommended for persistent asthma. Additionally, budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy (Symbicort SMART, AstraZeneca, Sweden) has been approved for adults in the European Union. This option is well tolerated and offers greater reductions in asthma exacerbations together with similar improvements in daily symptom control, at a lower overall steroid load, compared with fixed-dose ICS/LABA plus SABA.

Scope: Two large clinical trials investigated the use of budesonide/formoterol as maintenance and reliever compared with medium or high doses of an ICS/LABA combination as controller plus SABA as reliever in adults (aged ≥ 12 years). COMPASS was a 6-month, double blind, randomized trial while COSMOS was a 1?year, dose titration study which reflected routine clinical practice. The current review focuses on the findings in both studies, among adult patients only (aged ≥ 18 years).

Findings: Among adults, the studies confirmed a 21–39% reduction in severe exacerbations in patients treated with budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy compared with titrated salmeterol/fluticasone plus SABA (COSMOS) or fixed higher budesonide/formoterol or salmeterol/fluticasone plus SABA (COMPASS), respectively. Similar levels of daily asthma control were achieved with budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy at a significantly lower overall steroid load compared with salmeterol/fluticasone or budesonide/formoterol plus SABA. Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy was as well tolerated as combination therapies.

Conclusions: In adult patients, budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy is a safe and simplified approach to asthma management, using a single inhaler, which reduces severe exacerbations and maintains similar daily asthma control at a lower drug load compared with the traditional strategy of ICS/LABA plus SABA.     

Advances in asthma and COPD treatment: combination therapy with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta 2-agonists

Asthma treatment guidelines advocate the use of long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) in addition to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients whose asthma is uncontrolled by ICS alone, thereby addressing two processes fundamental to asthma: bronchoconstriction and inflammation. Superior control--including a reduction in severe exacerbations--of asthma and COPD by ICS/LABA combination therapy has been demonstrated. Results from clinical studies suggest additive and potentially synergistic effects when the two agents are used in combination. No new safety-related issues have been identified with ICS/LABA compared with the monocomponents. The exact mechanisms for the enhanced efficacy of ICS/LABA combinations are under investigation but likely include drug interactions at the receptor level and interwoven signalling pathways, which may result in improved function of 2- adrenoceptors and steroid receptors. Data from preclinical studies provide evidence of additive, compensatory, complementary and synergistic effects of ICS and LABA in the control of inflammation and airway and lung remodelling. These effects may contribute to the improved efficacy seen when treating asthma and COPD with ICS/LABA combinations in clinical studies. Two ICS/LABA combination products are available: budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort) and salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SeretideTM). An ICS/LABA combination in a single inhaler represent safe, effective and convenient treatment options for the management of patients with asthma and COPD. Clinical results also suggest that adjustable dosing with budesonide/formoterol provides better asthma control than fixed dosing. Further elucidation of the underlying mechanisms responsible for this superior disease control is needed.     

Inhaled salmeterol/fluticasone propionate: a review of its use in asthma

Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate, administered twice daily via a multidose dry powder inhaler (Seretide/Advair Diskus), Seretide Accuhaler or metered-dose hydrofluoroalkane (chlorofluorocarbon-free) inhaler (Seretide Evohaler), is a combination of the long-acting beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonist (beta(2)-agonist) [LABA] salmeterol and the corticosteroid fluticasone propionate.Maintenance therapy with combined salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is at least as effective in improving lung function and symptoms and is as well tolerated in patients with asthma as concurrent salmeterol plus fluticasone propionate. In patients previously receiving as-required short-acting beta(2)-agonists (SABAs) or inhaled corticosteroids, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was significantly more effective in providing asthma control than fluticasone propionate and in improving lung function and asthma symptoms than inhaled corticosteroids (at equivalent or higher dosages), salmeterol or montelukast (as monotherapy or in combination with fluticasone propionate). Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was more effective in improving asthma symptoms than adjusted-dose budesonide/formoterol in patients with uncontrolled asthma despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids with or without a LABA in a well designed 1-year study. In pharmacoeconomic analyses, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate compared favourably with inhaled corticosteroids and mono- or combination therapy with oral montelukast. Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is, therefore, an effective, well tolerated and cost-effective option for the maintenance treatment of patients with asthma.     

吸入糖皮质激素和长效β2-受体激动剂复方制剂治疗哮喘的研究进展

联合使用吸入糖皮质激素和长效β2-受体激动剂对控制哮喘的气道炎症和改善气道平滑肌功能具有协同和互补作用。吸入糖皮质激素和长效β2-受体激动剂复方制剂是目前哮喘维持治疗的重要药物,主要包括丙酸氟替卡松/沙美特罗、布地奈德/福莫特罗、二丙酸倍氯松/福莫特罗和糠酸莫米松/福莫特罗等。本文就此类复方制剂在哮喘治疗中的临床地位和研究进展作一概述。     

Inhaled salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in the management of asthma

Asthma guidelines recommend an inhaled corticosteroid plus a long-acting inhaled beta(2)-agonist (beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonist) as the preferred maintenance therapy for moderate and severe persistent asthma. Advair/Seretide Diskus also registered as Accuhaler is fixed-dose salmeterol (a long-acting inhaled beta(2)-agonist) and fluticasone propionate (a corticosteroid) administered via a single powder inhalation device. The clinical effectiveness of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate in patients with persistent asthma symptoms has been established in comparative clinical trials. Pharmacoeconomic analyses, based on data from these clinical trials, have been conducted from a healthcare payer perspective in various countries. In patients with asthma not controlled with inhaled corticosteroids, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was associated with more favourable (lower) cost-effectiveness ratios than fluticasone propionate monotherapy, oral montelukast plus inhaled fluticasone propionate, inhaled budesonide, and inhaled formoterol plus budesonide. As the initial maintenance therapy in patients with persistent asthma symptoms while receiving short-acting beta(2)-agonists alone, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was cost effective relative to montelukast monotherapy. Although the total cost of asthma management tended to be slightly higher with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate than with fluticasone propionate or montelukast monotherapy, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate consistently had a more favourable cost-effectiveness ratio in terms of per successfully treated week or symptom-free day and/or was associated with small incremental costs to achieve significant additional clinical benefits. In clinical practice, salmeterol plus fluticasone propionate was associated with lower asthma-related costs than treatment with other maintenance therapies.In patients with asthma symptoms despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate produced clinically meaningful improvements in overall Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) scores relative to salmeterol or placebo monotherapy, in emotional function domain scores relative to fluticasone propionate or budesonide, and in asthma symptoms domain scores relative to budesonide. In patients with persistent asthma symptoms while receiving short-acting beta(2)-agonists alone, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate produced clinically meaningful improvements in overall AQLQ scores compared with fluticasone propionate or montelukast. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacoeconomic analyses indicate that salmeterol/fluticasone propionate administered via a single inhaler represents a cost-effective treatment option (relative to fluticasone propionate at the same nominal dosage, budesonide, formoterol plus budesonide and montelukast plus fluticasone propionate) in patients with asthma not controlled with inhaled corticosteroid therapy. In patients with asthma not controlled with short-acting beta(2)-agonists alone, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is a cost effective treatment relative to monotherapy with montelukast. Importantly, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is also associated with improvements in health-related quality of life.     

Adjustable maintenance dosing with budesonide/formoterol compared with fixed-dose salmeterol/fluticasone in moderate to severe asthma

BACKGROUND: Current asthma guidelines recommend that patients are educated to adjust their medication according to their asthma severity using physician-guided self-management plans. However, many patients take a fixed dose of their controller medication and adjust their reliever medication according to asthma symptoms. OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether asthma control improved if patients adjusted the maintenance dose of budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler* 160/4.5 microg) according to asthma severity compared with traditional fixed dosing (FD) regimens. METHODS: Symptomatic patients with asthma (n = 658, mean symptom score 1.5, mean inhaled corticosteroids 735 microg/day, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)] 84% predicted) were randomised after 2 weeks' run-in to either: budesonide/formoterol adjustable maintenance dosing (AMD), budesonide/formoterol FD or salmeterol/fluticasone (Seretide Diskus dagger 50/250 microg) FD. In a 4-week double-blind period, both budesonide/formoterol AMD and FD groups received two inhalations twice daily (bid) and salmeterol/fluticasone FD patients received one inhalation bid. In the following 6-month open extension, both FD groups continued with the same treatment. Patients in the AMD group with well-controlled asthma stepped down to one inhalation bid; others continued with two inhalations bid. All AMD patients could increase to four inhalations bid for 7-14 days if symptoms worsened. All patients used terbutaline or salbutamol for symptom relief throughout. The primary variable was the odds of achieving a well-controlled asthma week (WCAW). RESULTS: The odds ratio for achieving a WCAW did not differ between the FD regimens; however, during the open period, budesonide/formoterol AMD increased the odds of achieving a WCAW vs. budesonide/formoterol FD (odds ratio 1.335; 95% CI: 1.001, 1.783; p = 0.049) despite a 15% reduction in average study drug use. Budesonide/formoterol AMD patients had a lower exacerbation rate over the study: 40% lower vs. salmeterol/fluticasone FD (p = 0.018); 32% lower vs. budesonide/formoterol FD (NS). During the double-blind period, there were no clinically relevant differences between the budesonide/formoterol FD and salmeterol/fluticasone FD groups. Budesonide/formoterol AMD patients used less reliever medication in the open extension: 0.58 vs. 0.92 occasions/day for budesonide/formoterol FD (p = 0.001) and 0.80 occasions/day for salmeterol/fluticasone FD (p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Adjustable maintenance dosing with budesonide/formoterol provides more effective asthma control by reducing exacerbations and reliever medication usage compared with fixed-dose salmeterol/fluticasone.     

Combination therapy in asthma--fixed or variable dosing in different patients?

The introduction of combination products, for the coadministration of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) with a long-acting beta2-agonist in a single inhaler, has greatly simplified asthma therapy. The two combination inhalers currently available, Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler) and Seretide (salmeterol/fluticasone), comply with Step 3 of international guidelines that recommend the addition of a long-acting beta2-agonist to ICS in patients who are inadequately controlled on ICS alone. Importantly, combination inhalers ensure that patients cannot neglect their ICS maintenance therapy in favour of the long-acting beta2-agonist--which may improve adherence and overall asthma control. In vitro experiments suggest that ICS and long-acting beta2-agonists may interact beneficially when they are administered via one inhaler. The efficacy and tolerability of budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone have been demonstrated. There are currently two approaches for treating asthma using combination therapy--fixed and adjustable dosing. Fixed dosing with budesonide/formoterol or salmeterol/fluticasone provides effective asthma control in line with guideline goals. However, given the inherent variability of asthma, there is increasing evidence that adjusting the dose of ICS according to fluctuations in symptoms is beneficial. Findings from a series of studies comparing fixed and adjustable symptom-guided dosing regimens demonstrate that adjustable dosing may improve asthma control at an overall lower steroid dose. Ultimately, if adjustable dosing proves to be an effective treatment option, it may be possible to use budesonide/formoterol for both maintenance therapy and symptom relief, thereby overcoming the need for a separate reliever inhaler. This is because formoterol has a more rapid onset and greater dose-related effects than salmeterol in salmeterol/fluticasone. Given that all patients are different, with different disease severities and treatment preferences, both fixed and adjustable dosing strategies are likely to be important in the long-term management of asthma. It is possible that different treatment options will be used for different patients, depending on their disease severity, personality and ability to adhere to therapy.     

Efficacy of Rhizophora mangle aqueous bark extract (RMABE) in the treatment of aphthous ulcers: a pilot study

SUMMARY

The introduction of combination products, for the co-administration of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) with a long-acting β2-agonist in a single inhaler, has greatly simplified asthma therapy. The two combination inhalers currently available, Symbicort* (budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler) and Seretidet (salmeterol/fluticasone), comply with Step 3 of international guidelines that recommend the addition of a long-acting β2-agonist to ICS in patients who are inadequately controlled on ICS alone. Importantly, combination inhalers ensure that patients cannot neglect their ICS maintenance therapy in favour of the long-acting β2-agonist -which may improve adherence and overall asthma control. In vitro experiments suggest that ICS and long-acting β2-agonists may interact beneficially when they are administered via one inhaler. The efficacy and tolerability of budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone have been demonstrated. There are currently two approaches for treating asthma using combination therapy - fixed and adjustable dosing. Fixed dosing with budesonide/ formoterol or salmeterol/fluticasone provides effective asthma control in line with guideline goals. However, given the inherent variability of asthma, there is increasing evidence that adjusting the dose of ICS according to fluctuations in symptoms is beneficial. Findings from a series of studies comparing fixed and adjustable symptom-guided dosing regimens demonstrate that adjustable dosing may improve asthma control at an overall lower steroid dose. Ultimately, if adjustable dosing proves to be an effective treatment option, it may be possible to use budesonide/formoterol for both maintenance therapy and symptom relief, thereby overcoming the need for a separate reliever inhaler. This is because formoterol has a more rapid onset and greater dose-related effects than salmeterol in salmeterol/fluticasone. Given that all patients are different, with different disease severities and treatment preferences, both fixed and adjustable dosing strategies are likely to be important in the long-term management of asthma. It is possible that different treatment options will be used for different patients, depending on their disease severity, personality and ability to adhere to therapy.     

Adjustable maintenance dosing with budesonide/formoterol compared with fixed-dose salmeterol/fluticasone in moderate to severe asthma

SUMMARY

Background: Current asthma guidelines recommend that patients are educated to adjust their medication according to their asthma severity using physician-guided self-management plans. However, many patients take a fixed dose of their controller medication and adjust their reliever medication according to asthma symptoms.

Objectives: This study examined whether asthma control improved if patients adjusted the maintenance dose of budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler 160/4.5 |ig) according to asthma severity compared with traditional fixed dosing (FD) regimens.

Methods: Symptomatic patients with asthma (n?=?658, mean symptom score 1.5, mean inhaled corticosteroids 735|ig/day, mean forced expiratory volume in 1?second [FEV1] 84% predicted) were randomised after 2 weeks' run-in to either: budesonide/formoterol adjustable maintenance dosing (AMD), budesonide/formoterol FD or salmeterol/fluticasone (Seretide Diskust 50/250 |ig) FD. In a 4-week double-blind period, both budesonide/formoterol AMD and FD groups received two inhalations twice daily (bid) and salmeterol/fluticasone FD patients received one inhalation bid. In the following 6-month open extension, both FD groups continued with the same treatment. Patients in the AMD group with well-controlled asthma stepped down to one inhalation bid; others continued with two inhalations bid. All AMD patients could increase to four inhalations bid for 7-14 days if symptoms worsened. All patients used terbutaline or salbutamol for symptom relief throughout. The primary variable was the odds of achieving a well-controlled asthma week (WCAW).

Results: The odds ratio for achieving a WCAW did not differ between the FD regimens; however, during the open period, budesonide/formoterol AMD increased the odds of achieving a WCAW vs. budesonide/formoterol FD (odds ratio 1.335; 95% CI: 1.001,1.783; p?=?0.049) despite a 15% reduction in average study drug use. Budesonide/formoterol AMD patients had a lower exacerbation rate over the study: 40% lower vs. salmeterol/fluticasone FD (p?=?0.018); 32% lower vs. budesonide/formoterol FD (NS). During the double-blind period, there were no clinically relevant differences between the budesonide/formoterol FD and salmeterol/fluticasone FD groups. Budesonide/formoterol AMD patients used less reliever medication in the open extension: 0.58 vs. 0.92 occasions/day for budesonide/formoterol FD (p?=?0.001) and 0.80 occasions/day for salmeterol/fluticasone FD (p?=?0.011).

Conclusions: Adjustable maintenance dosing with budesonide/formoterol provides more effective asthma control by reducing exacerbations and reliever medication usage compared with fixed-dose salmeterol/fluticasone.     

Comparison of combination inhalers vs inhaled corticosteroids alone in moderate persistent asthma

AIMS: Inhalers combining long acting beta2-adrenoceptor agonists (LABA) and corticosteroids (ICS) are indicated at Step 3 of current asthma guidelines. We evaluated the relative effects of LABA + ICS combination vs ICS alone on pulmonary function, bronchoprotection, acute salbutamol recovery following methacholine bronchial challenge, and surrogate inflammatory markers in patients with moderate persistent asthma. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with mean FEV1 (+/- SEM) of 78 +/- 3% predicted completed a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, cross-over study. Patients received either 4 weeks of budesonide 400 microg + formoterol 12 microg (BUD + FM) combination twice daily followed by 1 week of BUD 400 microg alone twice daily, or 4 weeks of fluticasone propionate 250 microg + salmeterol 50 microg (FP + SM) combination twice daily followed by 1 week of FP 250 microg alone twice daily. Measurements were made at baseline and following each randomized treatment. RESULTS: FEV1 increase from pretreatment baseline as mean (+/- SEM) % predicted was significantly higher (P < 0.05) for BUD + FM (8 +/- 1%) vs BUD (2 +/- 1%), and for FP + SM (8 +/- 1%) vs FP (2 +/- 1%). The fall in FEV1 following methacholine challenge as percentage change from prechallenge baseline FEV1 was not significantly different in all four groups; BUD + FM (22 +/- 1%), BUD (24 +/- 1%), FP + SM (23 +/- 1%) and FP (23 +/- 1%). Salbutamol recovery over 30 min following methacholine challenge as area under curve (AUC %.min) was significantly blunted (P < 0.05) with BUD + FM (486.7 +/- 35.5) vs BUD (281.1 +/- 52.8), and with FP + SM (553.1 +/- 34.1) vs FP (368.3 +/- 46.7). There were no significant differences between respective combination inhalers or between respective ICS alone. Decreases in exhaled nitric oxide (NO) and serum eosinophilic cationic protein (ECP) from baseline were not significantly different between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Combination inhalers improve pulmonary function without potentiating anti-inflammatory effects on exhaled NO and serum ECP as compared with ICS alone, but delay acute salbutamol recovery after bronchoconstriction.     

Safe use of long-acting β-agonists: what have we learnt?

INTRODUCTION: Long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) added to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) reduce symptoms, improve lung function and enhance overall asthma control. However, several studies have indicated an increased risk of asthma mortality and asthma-related serious adverse events and the FDA recently mandated restrictions to the use of LABAs in asthma. AREAS COVERED: This review highlights the clinical studies on which safety analyses pertaining to salmeterol and formoterol have been based and then focuses on recent meta-analyses of safety outcomes with and without consideration of concomitant ICS. EXPERT OPINION: The phenomenon of masking of inflammation by LABA if ICS dose is insufficient underscores the potential for confounding in determining real safety risks. Under-treatment with ICS and differential dosing of ICS in many trials are major factors driving the LABA safety concern. The FDA meta-analysis, when stratified for mandatory ICS use, found no significant increase in the composite outcome of asthma mortality, intubations and hospitalizations. Add-on therapy with LABA is effective and safe if the dose of ICS is adequate to treat airway inflammation. LABA and ICS given in a single device will negate the possibility of LABA monotherapy which is contraindicated. The FDA has recommended that LABAs be withdrawn when control is achieved with combination therapy but recent evidence suggests this may result in loss of symptom control.     

Anticonvulsant hypersensitivity syndrome: an update

Introduction: Long-acting β-agonists (LABAs) added to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) reduce symptoms, improve lung function and enhance overall asthma control. However, several studies have indicated an increased risk of asthma mortality and asthma-related serious adverse events and the FDA recently mandated restrictions to the use of LABAs in asthma.

Areas covered: This review highlights the clinical studies on which safety analyses pertaining to salmeterol and formoterol have been based and then focuses on recent meta-analyses of safety outcomes with and without consideration of concomitant ICS.

Expert opinion: The phenomenon of masking of inflammation by LABA if ICS dose is insufficient underscores the potential for confounding in determining real safety risks. Under-treatment with ICS and differential dosing of ICS in many trials are major factors driving the LABA safety concern. The FDA meta-analysis, when stratified for mandatory ICS use, found no significant increase in the composite outcome of asthma mortality, intubations and hospitalizations. Add-on therapy with LABA is effective and safe if the dose of ICS is adequate to treat airway inflammation. LABA and ICS given in a single device will negate the possibility of LABA monotherapy which is contraindicated. The FDA has recommended that LABAs be withdrawn when control is achieved with combination therapy but recent evidence suggests this may result in loss of symptom control.     

Pediatric asthma controller therapy

The treatment of children with asthma has historically relied upon expert opinion using data extrapolated from adult studies. Over the past few years, landmark studies have been completed providing healthcare professionals with evidence on which a reasonable approach can be made for children suffering from this common and serious disease. Asthmatic phenotype in children, unlike adults, tends to differ according to age, which must be taken into account as well as triggers, severity, and level of control. The care of the child with asthma is complex, but accumulating data have demonstrated that we are on the right path for optimizing control while reducing the burden of side effects. The newest Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines, as well as recent updates from the landmark CAMP (Childhood Asthma Management Program) study and information from the PACT (Pediatric Asthma Control Trial) and budesonide/formoterol controller and reliever studies, along with recent comparisons of higher dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), and ICS/long-acting β(2)-adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) combination and leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) therapies in children have clarified a few of the big questions in pediatric asthma. For children with asthma aged 5 years and older, the CAMP trial demonstrated that regular use of ICS reduces the frequency of symptoms; however, height was adversely affected and there is no evidence for altering the natural history of asthma. In patients aged 6 years and over whose asthma is uncontrolled on ICS alone, combination therapy with ICS and a LABA has been recently compared with the use of higher dose ICS and the addition of an LTRA in pediatric patients. The addition of a LABA statistically will be of most benefit; however, some children will have optimal control with doubling the baseline dose of ICS or addition of an LTRA. Use of budesonide/formoterol as a controller and reliever therapy extends the time to first exacerbation versus contemporary use of this medication in patients aged 4 years and older. Ciclesonide, a newer ICS, has demonstrated acceptable efficacy but has the added benefit of not affecting growth. Certainly, with mounting evidence, the care-map in pediatric asthma control is becoming clearer.     

Comparing the efficacy and safety of salmeterol/fluticasone pMDI versus its mono-components,other LABA/ICS pMDIs and salmeterol/fluticasone Diskus in patients with asthma

Introduction: Pressurized metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) are evolving to be a very effective drug delivery option in patients with airway diseases. They offer comparable lung deposition and reduced oropharyngeal deposition similar with the dry powder inhalers. As recommended by the Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines, the ideal maintenance treatment for asthma is a combination of long acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). One of the available LABA/ICS combinations is the salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination (SFC) and a plethora of evidence supports its clinical efficacy and safety.

Areas covered: This article focuses on the SFC hydrofluroalkane pMDI and compares the efficacy and tolerability with salmeterol and fluticasone given individually, and with other fixed-dose combinations namely formoterol/fluticasone, formoterol/beclometasone and formoterol/mometasone furoate, all delivered via pMDI. Also discussed is the efficacy and tolerability of the SFC delivered via a pMDI, as compared to the SFC via Diskus.

Expert opinion: pMDIs play an important role in inhalation therapy given the low price, low maintenance and convenience of use. LABA/ICS combinations are the preferred choice of medication for asthma treatment and will remain the mainstay for the decades to come. In our opinion, pMDI should be the choice of device to administer LABA/ICS maintenance therapy, as it is already being used by the patients for reliever therapy, which may eventually improve patient adherence and compliance.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy versus fixed combination treatments for asthma in Finland

ABSTRACT

Background: Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy has shown its effectiveness as a treatment for moderate-to-severe asthma.

Objective: To explore the cost-effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy as compared to fixed combination therapies (budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone) with terbutaline as needed in the treatment of asthma in Finland.

Methods: Patients without asthma exacerbations during a 6-month period were used as the effectiveness variable in the within-trial economic analysis. Finnish unit costs were applied to pooled resource use data, and multinomial cost-effectiveness plane and acceptability curves were formed based on bootstrapping.

Results: Use of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy significantly reduced the rate of severe asthma exacerbations as compared with a fixed dose of budesonide/formoterol or salmeterol/fluticasone and terbutaline as needed. Total costs over 6 months were €496 per patient for those who used the budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy treatment model, which was €78–101 lower than the cost of fixed combinations of salmeterol/fluticasone or budesonide/formoterol with terbutaline as needed. The results indicate that the budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy achieves a high probability (> 93%) of cost effectiveness irrespective of willingness to pay level.

Conclusions: Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy may be considered in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma instead of conventional treatment with combination products in view of its good clinical efficacy and a high probability of cost-effectiveness in the Finnish setting. However, a cost-effectiveness analysis with a longer time horizon, more Finnish-specific data, and ICS + short/long-acting inhaled β₂-agonist as an additional comparator is still warranted.     

A proof of concept study to evaluate putative benefits of montelukast in moderate persistent asthmatics

AIMS: Whether chronic dosing with montelukast confers benefit in patients with moderate to severe asthma remains to be fully established. A proof of concept study was performed evaluating putative benefits with montelukast in moderate persistent asthmatics who were taken off inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and switched to salmeterol. The latter was done to dissociate the effects of montelukast from ICS. METHODS: Twenty moderate to severe persistent asthmatics completed a randomized double-blind crossover study. Subjects received montelukast 10 mg daily or placebo for 2 weeks each. This was preceded by a 2-week run-in when ICS were discontinued and salmeterol started, and used on a regular basis throughout the study. Measurements were made after run-in and after both randomized treatments. RESULTS: There were no significant sequence effects for responses as to whether placebo or montelukast were given first or second. Methacholine PD20 values after run-in, first and second placebo were 63 micro g, 60 micro g and 64 micro g, respectively (corresponding to 2, 4 and 6 weeks of ICS washout, respectively). Lung function deteriorated pre vs post run-in, which was significant (P < 0.05) for FEF25-75 % predicted. Montelukast conferred significant (P < 0.05) improvements as change from post run-in compared with placebo in methacholine PD20, FEV1 % predicted, FEF25-75 % predicted, diurnal peak expiratory flow, symptoms and salbutamol use. For the primary outcome of methacholine PD20, this amounted to a 1.6-fold difference (95% CI 1.1, 2.5). CONCLUSIONS: In moderate persistent asthmatics switched from taking ICS to salmeterol alone, adding montelukast conferred significant benefits on all parameters of asthma control. Further studies are indicated to evaluate whether montelukast exhibits additive effects to ICS/long-acting beta2-adrenoceptor agonist combination inhalers upon clinically important outcomes.     

Inhaled corticosteroids as combination therapy with β-adrenergic agonists in airways disease: present and future

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy in combination with long-acting β-adrenergic agonists represents the most important treatment for chronic airways diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). ICS therapy forms the basis for treatment of asthma of all severities, improving asthma control, lung function and preventing exacerbations of disease. Use of ICS has also been established in the treatment of COPD, particularly symptomatic patients, who experience useful gains in quality of life, likely from an improvement in symptoms such as breathlessness and in reduction in exacerbations, and an attenuation of the yearly rate of deterioration in lung function. The addition of long-acting β-agonist (LABA) therapy with ICS increases the efficacy of ICS effects in moderate-to-severe asthma. Thus, a 800 μg daily dose of the ICS budesonide reduced severe exacerbation rates by 49% compared to a low dose of 200 μg daily, and addition of the LABA formoterol to budesonide (800 μg) led to a 63% reduction. In COPD, the effects of ICS are less prominent but there are beneficial effects on the decline in FEV₁ and the rate of exacerbations. A reduction in the rate of decline in FEV₁ of 16 ml/year with a 25% reduction in exacerbation rate has been reported with the salmeterol and fluticasone combination. A non-significant 17.5% reduction in all-cause mortality rate with ICS and LABA is reported. Chronic inflammation is a feature of both asthma and COPD, although there are site and characteristic differences. ICS targets this inflammation although this effect of ICS is less effective in patients with severe asthma and with COPD; however, addition of LABA may potentiate the anti-inflammatory effects of ICS. An important consideration is the presence of corticosteroid insensitivity in these patients. Currently available ICS have variably potent binding activities to specific glucocorticoid receptors, leading to inhibition of gene expression by either binding to DNA and inducing anti-inflammatory genes or by repressing the induction of pro-inflammatory mediators. Local side effects of ICS include oral candidiasis, hoarseness and dysphonia, while systemic side effects, such as easy bruising and reduction in growth velocity or bone mineral densitometry, are usually restricted to doses above maximally recommended doses. Use of LABA alone in patients with asthma increases the risk of asthma-related events including deaths, but this is less observed with the combination of ICS and LABA. Therefore, use of LABA alone is not recommended for asthma therapy. Future progress in ICS development will be characterised by the introduction of ICS with greater efficacy with a limited side-effect profile, and by longer-acting ICS that can be used in combination with once-daily LABAs. Other agents that could improve the efficacy of corticosteroids or reverse corticosteroid insensitivity may be added to ICS. ICS in combination with LABAs will continue to remain the main focus of treatment of airways diseases.