Formoterol provides long-lasting protection against exercise-induced bronchospasm.

BACKGROUND: Patients with exercise-induced bronchospasm (EIB) may benefit from a prophylactic beta2-adrenergic agonist that combines rapid onset with long duration of action. OBJECTIVE: To compare the protective effect against EIB of a single inhaled dose of formoterol powder delivered via the Aerolizer inhaler (Novartis Pharmaceuticals, East Hanover, NJ) with the effect of placebo and albuterol. METHODS: Eighteen patients with EIB were randomized to treatment in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, four-way, crossover study. Seventeen patients completed all four crossover periods. Each patient received in random sequence a single dose of formoterol (12 or 24 microg), albuterol (180 microg), or placebo at intervals of 5 +/- 2 days. Pulmonary function measurements were taken before and after exercise challenge tests (ECTs) at 15 minutes postdosing and at 4, 8, and 12 hours postdosing. RESULTS: Both doses of formoterol produced significantly greater protection against EIB, compared with placebo, at all timepoints (P < or = 0.016). The two doses of formoterol were not significantly different from one another at any time. Protection against EIB with albuterol was clinically significant only for the 15-minute ECT and was statistically superior to placebo for the 15-minute and 4-hour ECTs. Although formoterol and albuterol exhibited a rapid onset of action, formoterol provided longer-lasting protection over the 12-hour observation period. Rescue medication was used substantially less with either dose of formoterol, compared with albuterol or placebo. All treatments were well tolerated. Two-hour postdosing electrocardiograms and vital signs were unremarkable for all study treatments. CONCLUSION: A single dose of formoterol (12 or 24 microg) provides protection against EIB within 15 minutes of dosing and persists for up to 12 hours. Formoterol is safe and well tolerated.     

A randomized, 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing formoterol dry powder inhaler with albuterol metered-dose inhaler.

BACKGROUND: Formoterol is a beta2-adrenergic agent which, when inhaled, produces rapid and long-lasting bronchodilatation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of formoterol powder for inhalation delivered via the Aerolizer device with placebo and with albuterol delivered via metered-dose inhaler in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study, 541 patients were randomized at 26 trial sites to receive either formoterol, 12 microg twice daily; formoterol, 24 microg twice daily; albuterol, 180 microg four times daily; or a placebo for 12 weeks. The effects of each treatment on lung function, asthma symptoms, and frequency of rescue albuterol use were evaluated. Adverse effects and clinical laboratory parameters were also evaluated. RESULTS: The bronchodilatory effects of formoterol were rapid in onset and persisted for 12 hours. Both formoterol doses were more effective than placebo and albuterol for objective measures of lung function. Morning and evening peak expiratory flow rates were more improved with formoterol, and formoterol provided significantly greater improvements in asthma symptom scores compared with both albuterol and placebo. Overall, patients taking formoterol used significantly less rescue medication than did those taking albuterol or placebo. Nocturnal awakenings occurred less often with formoterol than with placebo or albuterol. The therapeutic effects of formoterol were maintained over the entire 12 weeks of treatment. Adverse events were similar for all treatment groups, and clinical laboratory data were unremarkable. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid-onset, long-acting formoterol, administered via the Aerolizer inhaler, is an effective and safe treatment for patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma.     

A comparison of salmeterol with albuterol in the treatment of mild-to-moderate asthma.

BACKGROUND. An effective, long-acting bronchodilator could benefit patients with asthma who have symptoms not controlled by antiinflammatory drugs. We compared a new long-acting, inhaled beta 2-adrenoceptor agonist, salmeterol, with a short-acting beta 2-agonist, albuterol, in the treatment of mild-to-moderate asthma. METHODS. We randomly assigned 234 patients (150 male and 84 female patients 12 to 73 years old) to one of three treatment groups: one group received 42 micrograms of salmeterol twice daily, one received 180 micrograms of albuterol four times daily, and one received placebo. Treatment was assigned in a double-blind fashion, and all patients could use supplemental inhaled albuterol as needed during the 12-week treatment period. RESULTS. Measurements of the forced expiratory volume in one second, performed hourly for 12 consecutive hours, showed that a single dose of salmeterol produced a greater mean area under the curve than two doses of albuterol taken 6 hours apart (6.3 vs. 4.9 liter.hr, P < 0.05). The difference was significant on day 1 and at week 4 of the study, but not at week 8 or 12. Salmeterol was also more effective than albuterol or placebo (with albuterol taken as needed) in increasing the morning peak expiratory flow rate: salmeterol induced a mean increase of 24 liters per minute over the pretreatment values, as compared with a decrease of 6 liters per minute with albuterol (P < 0.001) and an increase of 1 liter per minute with placebo (P = 0.002). The mean overall symptom score was improved most by salmeterol treatment (P < 0.05), with the number of days with symptoms and of nights with awakenings decreasing by 22 percent and 52 percent, respectively; there were no differences in results between albuterol treatment and placebo administration. We found no evidence of tolerance to the bronchodilating effects of salmeterol, and adverse reactions to all the treatments were infrequent and mild. CONCLUSIONS. For the management of mild-to-moderate asthma, salmeterol given twice daily is superior to albuterol given either four times daily or as needed.     

Comparison of inhaled albuterol powder and aerosol in asthma

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of aerosolized albuterol with the dry powder formulation, 231 patients with chronic reversible obstructive airway disease were randomly allocated to receive either placebo albuterol aerosol followed immediately by active albuterol powder (200 micrograms) or active albuterol aerosol (two puffs, 180 micrograms) followed immediately by placebo lactose powder four times a day for a period of 12 weeks. No statistically significant differences were found between the powder and aerosol formulations with respect to pulmonary function, length of time mean FEV1 remained greater than or equal to 15% above baseline, physicians' assessments of patients' clinical response, or patients' subjective symptom scores. There were also no significant differences between treatment groups in cardiovascular effects, laboratory values, or adverse events. Among patients who expressed a preference for one of the delivery systems, half preferred using the powder. Results of this study demonstrate that 200 micrograms of albuterol powder is as safe and effective as 180 micrograms of albuterol aerosol.     

Albuterol treatment for children with asthma: a comparison of inhaled powder and aerosol

A dose-ranging study and a 12-week treatment study were conducted in children with asthma, aged 4 to 12 years, to assess the efficacy and safety of albuterol inhaled as either an aerosol or as dry powder. Both studies were double-blind and placebo-controlled with randomized assignment to treatment. The dose-ranging study in 30 patients indicated that similar single doses of albuterol aerosol and powder had comparable effects with the intermediate doses (i.e., 180 micrograms of aerosol and 200 micrograms of powder) providing effective bronchodilation with minimal adverse effects. In the subsequent 12-week, parallel-group study, 204 children received albuterol as either aerosol, 180 micrograms, or powder, 200 micrograms four times a day. Both formulations were equally effective with no untoward cardiovascular effects and only one incident of mild tremor. Among those children who expressed a preference for one of the delivery systems, significantly more children preferred the powder (44% versus 26%, p less than 0.01). Albuterol taken four times a day as either aerosol or dry powder is both effective and well tolerated in children with asthma.     

Prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm in pediatric asthma patients: a comparison of salmeterol powder with albuterol.

BACKGROUND: Exercise-induced bronchospasm (EIB) is a common problem in children with asthma. Pretreatment with the beta2 (beta 2)-adrenoreceptor agonist albuterol is effective for preventing EIB, but is recognized as providing only short-term (2 to 3 hour) protection. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the 12-hour efficacy and safety of single doses of 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms of salmeterol powder administered via Diskus inhaler versus albuterol aerosol via pressurized metered-dose inhaler and placebo in preventing EIB in asthmatic children. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, single-dose, four-way crossover study was conducted in pediatric patients (4 to 11 years of age) demonstrating EIB and mild-to-moderate asthma. Serial forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) was measured before and after standard treadmill exercise at hour 1, hour 6, and hour 12 after administration of 25 micrograms or 50 micrograms salmeterol powder, 180 micrograms albuterol aerosol, or placebo. Adverse events were recorded. RESULTS: After completion of the hour 1 exercise challenge, mean minimum % predicted FEV1 was significantly higher following albuterol (91.3%) than for placebo (75.3%) and for both dosages of salmeterol (86.9% and 85.8% for salmeterol 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms, respectively; P < or = .026). After completion of both the hour 6 and hour 12 exercise challenges, the 50-microgram salmeterol treatment produced a significantly higher mean minimum percent of predicted FEV1 (90.6% and 87.3% predicted, respectively) than the mean minimum percent of predicted FEV1 for placebo or albuterol (73.8% to 78.4% of predicted; P < or = .041). At hour 6, the 25-microgram salmeterol treatment was not significantly different from albuterol or placebo. At hour 12, the 25-microgram salmeterol treatment mean minimum percent of predicted was significantly higher than albuterol (87.9% versus 73.8% of predicted; P = .006) and there was also a trend toward significance over placebo (76.9% predicted; P = .056). At all exercise periods, no statistically significant differences in spirometry values were observed between the two salmeterol treatment groups. Safety profiles were similar among treatments, including placebo. No drug-related adverse events or withdrawals due to adverse events occurred. Changes in laboratory values, vital signs, 12-lead ECGs, and physical examinations were unremarkable. CONCLUSIONS: A single 50-microgram dose of salmeterol powder provided effective and safe protection against EIB for at least 12 hours in asthmatic children and provided a significantly more prolonged effect than albuterol aerosol (180 micrograms).     

Once-daily budesonide via Turbuhaler improves symptoms in adults with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of twice-daily budesonide Turbuhaler (Pulmicort Turbuhaler, AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE) for the treatment of mild to severe asthma. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of budesonide Turbuhaler administered once daily each morning with placebo in inhaled corticosteroid-naive adults with persistent asthma. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study, 177 adults (aged 18 to 70 years) received placebo or once-daily budesonide Turbuhaler (400 microg) for 12 weeks. Efficacy variables included mean changes from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and AM/PM peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), and nighttime/daytime asthma symptom scores, patient discontinuations, use of breakthrough medication (albuterol), forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC (FEF25%-75%), and quality of life assessments. Safety was evaluated based on adverse events, physical examinations, vital signs, and laboratory tests. RESULTS: Demographic and baseline characteristics were comparable between study groups. The mean percentages of predicted FEV1 at baseline were 71.9 +/- 9.8 in patients receiving budesonide Turbuhaler and 70.6 +/- 11.0 in patients receiving placebo. Mean changes from baseline over the 12-week treatment period in FEV1 were significantly (P = 0.007) improved in patients receiving once-daily budesonide Turbuhaler compared with placebo (0.31 L and 0.17 L, respectively). Significant (P < or = 0.037) improvements over placebo also were observed in AM PEFR, nighttime/daytime asthma symptoms, and albuterol use with budesonide Turbuhaler treatment. Adverse events were generally mild or moderate in intensity and similar between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide Turbuhaler 400 microg administered once daily in the AM is efficacious and safe for inhaled corticosteroid-naive asthmatic adults.     

Improved bronchodilation with levalbuterol compared with racemic albuterol in patients with asthma

Background: Racemic albuterol is an equal mixture of (R)-albuterol (levalbuterol), which is responsible for the bronchodilator effect, and (S)-albuterol, which provides no benefit and may be detrimental. Objective: We sought to compare 2 doses of a single enantiomer, levalbuterol (0.63 mg and 1.25 mg), and equivalent amounts of levalbuterol administered as racemic albuterol with placebo in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. Methods: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Three hundred sixty-two patients 12 years of age or older were treated with study drug administered by means of nebulization 3 times daily for 28 days. The primary endpoint was peak change in FEV₁ after 4 weeks. Results: The change in peak FEV₁ response to the first dose in the combined levalbuterol group was significantly greater compared with the combined racemic albuterol group (0.92 and 0.82 L, respectively; P = .03), with similar but nonsignificant results after 4 weeks (0.84 and 0.74 L, respectively). Improvement in FEV₁ was similar for levalbuterol 0.63 mg and racemic albuterol 2.5 mg and greatest for levalbuterol 1.25 mg. Racemic albuterol 1.25 mg demonstrated the weakest bronchodilator effect, particularly after chronic dosing. The greatest increase in FEV₁ was seen after levalbuterol 1.25 mg, especially in subjects with severe asthma. All active treatments were well tolerated, and β-adrenergic side effects after administration of levalbuterol 0.63 mg were reduced relative to levalbuterol 1.25 mg or racemic albuterol 2.5 mg. At week 4, the predose FEV₁ value was greatest in patients who received levalbuterol or placebo when compared with those who received racemic albuterol. The difference was more evident and was statistically significant in patients who were not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Conclusion: Levalbuterol appears to provide a better therapeutic index than the standard dose of racemic albuterol. These results support the concept that (S)-albuterol may have detrimental effects on pulmonary function. (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998;102:943-52.)     

Need for theophylline in severe steroid-requiring asthmatics

Concern about side-effects of theophylline prompted us to investigate whether this drug could be eliminated from the multi-medication regimen of severe asthmatics. We studied patients with a demonstrated requirement for systemic steroids who were taking most other available anti-asthma medications in an attempt to reduce systemic steroids while maintaining clinical stability. Five in-patients, 12–15 years old, completed a double-blind, cross-over trial of theophylline vs placebo. All were stable for 4 weeks prior to the study with normal spirometry and mildly elevated lung volumes. Regular medications consisted of long-acting theophylline with levels between 12 mcg/ml and 16 mcg/ml, and prednisone 10–30 mg on alternate days. In addition, they were all taking inhaled metaproterenol, cromolyn sodium, atropine sulphate, and beclomethasone dipropionate four times daily (qid). Patients received either theophylline or placebo during two drug periods. All other medications were unchanged. Parameters measured were symptom score, number of extra respiratory treatments (prn RTs), increase in steroid dosage, and daily spirometry. During the placebo period, all five patients required increased steroids, daily spirometry decreased and three patients developed severe exacerbations unrelated to viral infection. A marked increase in symptom score occurred within 48 hr of discontinuing theophylline in all. These findings emphasize that theophylline is beneficial in a subset of severe asthmatics who cannot be controlled with all other available bronchodilators, cromolyn, and inhaled and systemic steroids.     

Long-term, double-blind comparison of controlled-release albuterol versus sustained-release theophylline in adolescents and adults with asthma

This parallel-group study compared the safety and efficacy of controlled-release albuterol versus sustained-release theophylline, both administered every 12 hours. One hundred twenty-four adolescent and adult patients with asthma and with chronic reversible obstructive airway disease were studied. All patients qualified with an FEV1 less than or equal to 80% of predicted (not receiving treatment) and greater than or equal to 15% reversibility in FEV1 or greater than or equal to 25% reversibility in FEF25-75% after inhaled isoproterenol. All patients were known to be able to take theophylline without unacceptable adverse effects. Theophylline was titrated for patients to receive, unblinded, theophylline serum concentrations of 10 to 20 micrograms/ml. With subsequent randomization, 62 patients continued to receive theophylline and 62 patients started taking albuterol in the 12-week, double-blind, double-dummy portion of the study. Pulmonary function was measured during a pretreatment visit (unmedicated) and serial assessment was made starting just before the morning dose and continuing for 12 hours after the dose at the end of 1, 6, and 12 weeks of treatment. Both treatment groups exhibited statistically significant increases in FEV1 from the pretreatment visit to all times of observation at weeks 1, 6, and 12. The increases in FEV1 were not significantly different between albuterol and theophylline administration. There was no evidence of tolerance to the bronchodilatory effect during 12 weeks in either treatment group. Only one patient in the study stopped treatment because of an adverse effect. This patient had tremor during albuterol administration. All other adverse events were tolerated or resolved during treatment.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Bricanyl® Turbuhaler® and Ventolin® Rotahaler® in exercise-induced asthma in children

Bricanyl Turbuhaler (0.5 mg terbutaline sulphate) and Ventolin Rotahaler (0.4 mg salbutamol) were compared in a randomized double-blind placebo controlled study on exercise-induced asthma in 19 children (14 boys) aged 7-14 years. The study was carried out on 3 separate days. Asthmatic attacks were provoked by free range running. Peak expiratory flow (PEF) was measured before and after exercise. If PEF decreased by greater than 20%, one inhalation from each of the inhalers was given under supervision of the investigator. Only one of the inhalers (none on the placebo day) delivered active drug. PEF was measured again 5 and 10 min after treatment. Already 5 min after treatment PEF had returned to baseline after active treatment. There was no statistically significant difference between the two active treatments. After placebo treatment, PEF did not return to baseline even at the 10 min post-exercise measurement. Ten children needed extra medication after the last PEF measurement on the placebo day, whereas no child needed extra medication after any of the active treatments. No adverse events were reported in this study. In conclusion, Bricanyl Turbuhaler (0.5 mg) and Ventolin Rotahaler (0.4 mg) were equally efficacious in the treatment of exercise-induced asthma in children.     

Effect of bronchodilator therapy administered by canister versus jet nebulizer

Bronchodilator efficacy of metaproterenol sulfate aerosol therapy delivered either by canister or jet nebulizer was compared in 25 patients, 13 with severe asthma and 12 with COPD. Treatment was carried out in double-blind crossover fashion on 2 days and consisted of either metaproterenol sulfate solution 15 mg in 2.3 ml administered from a jet nebulizer or three puffs of metered-dose metaproterenol sulfate (total 1.95 mg) inhaled sequentially. FVC and FEV1 were monitored before and after therapy for 2 hr. In 13 asthmatic patients, FEV1 increased from a baseline mean of 0.83 L to 1.57 L at 2 hr after jet nebulizer therapy and increased from 0.84 L to 1.52 L after canister therapy. In 12 patients with COPD, FEV1 increased from 0.58 L to 0.78 L after jet nebulizer therapy and from 0.57 L to 0.76 L after canister therapy. FVC also increased similarly after each form of therapy. The two types of aerosol therapy were equally effective and were without side effects. Canister therapy has the advantage over jet nebulizer therapy by being convenient and cheaper.     

Effect of formoterol fumarate treatment on exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in children.

BACKGROUND: Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is common, particularly in children. OBJECTIVES: To compare the protective effect of single doses of formoterol fumarate via Aerolizer with placebo and albuterol in children with EIB. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, crossover trial, 23 children (aged 4-11 years) received formoterol, 12 or 24 microg; albuterol, 180 microg; or placebo at 4 separate visits. Protection against EIB was evaluated as the maximum percentage decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from the preexercise value after exercise challenge tests (6-minute treadmill) conducted 15 minutes and 4, 8, and 12 hours after administration of the dose. RESULTS: The maximum percentage decrease in FEV1 after the 4-hour exercise test (primary efficacy variable) was significantly less for formoterol, 12 and 24 microg, vs placebo (P < .001 for both) or albuterol (P = .016 and .010, respectively); albuterol was not significantly different from placebo. Formoterol, 12 and 24 microg, differed from placebo at 8 hours (P = .002 and .001, respectively), with a smaller difference between albuterol and placebo (P = .045). Rescue medication use and a high dropout rate may have biased treatment differences at later time points. Protection against EIB (<20% maximum decrease in FEV1) across all time points was observed for 17 (77%) of 22 and 17 (74%) of 23 children with formoterol, 12 and 24 microg, respectively, compared with 8 (35%) of 23 with albuterol and 6 (27%) of 22 with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Single doses of formoterol, 12 or 24 microg, are effective in protecting against EIB in children, affording a statistically significantly greater protective effect than placebo or albuterol.     

One-year efficacy and safety of inhaled formoterol dry powder in children with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: The long-term efficacy and safety of formoterol dry powder capsules for inhalation in pediatric asthma have not previously been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: We examined the effectiveness of inhaled formoterol over a period of 12 months in asthmatic children who were still symptomatic despite anti-inflammatory treatment. METHODS: After a run-in period, 518 patients (5 to 12 years old) were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive 12 or 24 microg formoterol dry powder (Foradil, Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland) or placebo twice daily for 12 months. The drug was administered by inhaler (Aerolizer, Novartis Pharma AG) and was given in addition to their anti-inflammatory treatment. The primary variable was the area under the curve for forced expiratory volume in 1 second measured over 12 hours after the morning dose of study medication. RESULTS: The area under the curve for forced expiratory volume in 1 second after the first dose of treatment and after 3 and 12 months of treatment was significantly greater for patients receiving formoterol 12 microg and 24 microg than for patients receiving placebo (all P < or = 0.0062). Compared with placebo, both doses of formoterol significantly improved morning and evening premedication peak expiratory flow rate (all P < 0.001). In the group treated with formoterol 24 microg, median symptom score and median dose of rescue medication at night were lower than during the run-in period, whereas the opposite occurred in the placebo group. The incidence of hospitalizations for asthma was higher in the formoterol groups than in the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that, in asthmatic children who are still symptomatic despite anti-inflammatory therapy, the addition of formoterol consistently improves airflow obstruction and nocturnal symptoms and reduces the use of rescue medication. However, this treatment requires close disease monitoring to detect early signs of acute exacerbation.     

Effects of oral cetirizine, a selective H1 antagonist, on allergen- and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in subjects with asthma

The protective efficacy of oral cetirizine, a selective and potent H1-receptor antagonist, against the immediate bronchoconstrictive response to allergen inhalation and exercise challenge was evaluated in 16 subjects with stable, predominantly mild asthma. The subjects underwent double-blind, crossover pretreatments in randomized order in two separate protocols with (1) three daily oral doses of 20 mg of cetirizine and placebo, followed by allergen inhalation, and (2) single oral doses of cetirizine (5, 10, and 20 mg), albuterol (4 mg), and placebo, followed by exercise with cold-air inhalation. Cetirizine failed to decrease bronchial sensitivity to inhaled allergen in eight of 10 subjects. Neither cetirizine nor albuterol uniformly inhibited exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. Serum concentrations of cetirizine were consistent with systemic H1-blocking activity. Modest bronchodilation occurred after administration of cetirizine and albuterol before exercise but not after the third dose of cetirizine in the allergen protocol. One subject developed moderate drowsiness during multiple dosing with cetirizine. Thus, cetirizine, in the doses studied, is not uniformly effective in preventing allergen- or exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. Histamine is one of many mediators participating in immediate asthmatic responses, and selective H1 antagonists do not completely block these airway events. However, cetirizine may still clinically benefit some patients with asthma, such as patients with allergic rhinitis or urticaria.     

Salmeterol, a new inhaled beta 2-adrenergic agonist, has a longer blocking effect than albuterol on hyperventilation-induced bronchoconstriction.

The duration of the blocking effect of salmeterol (50 micrograms), albuterol (200 micrograms), and a placebo were compared in a double-blind study in 12 adult subjects with asthma who underwent hyperventilation tests with cold dry air (-20 degrees C) on 4 study days. On the first day, the hyperventilation test was performed at various time intervals (baseline, 1, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours) with spontaneous functional recovery between each test to determine the within-day within-subject variability of the response. The response was assessed by interpolating the dose of cold dry air causing a 20% fall in FEV1. On the 3 remaining days, separated by an interval of at least 5 days, the active or placebo medication was administered after spontaneous recovery from the first hyperventilation test. Spirometry was assessed 15 minutes and 1 hour later. The hyperventilation test was then performed and repeated 4 hours after administration of the drug. The test was repeated 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours later to detect any significant blocking effect. The improvement in FEV1 15 minutes and 1 hour after the drug was administered was 19.8% and 20.4%, as compared to baseline for albuterol, and 16.3% and 16.8% for salmeterol (not significant). The mean duration of the blocking effect was 0.25 hour for the placebo, 3.5 hours for albuterol, and 15.9 hours for salmeterol (F = 24.5; p less than 0.001; Newman-Keul's test was significant for every contrast). Eight of the 12 subjects still demonstrated some blocking effect 8 hours after taking salmeterol; this was true for only one subject receiving albuterol.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Efficacy and safety of inhaled fluticasone propionate chlorofluorocarbon in 2- to 4-year-old patients with asthma: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Current asthma guidelines recommend inhaled glucocorticoids administered via pressurized metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with a holding chamber as the preferred therapy for young children with asthma. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate chlorofluorocarbon MDI use in preschool-aged children with asthma. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of 332 children aged 24 to 47 months with asthma. Fluticasone propionate chlorofluorocarbon, 44 or 88 microg twice daily, or placebo (chlorofluorocarbon propellant alone) administered for 12 weeks via MDI with a valved holding chamber and an attached face mask. The primary efficacy measure was average change in 24-hour daily asthma symptom scores. Safety assessments included adverse events, 12-hour urinary cortisol excretion, and growth. RESULTS: Treatment failure (ie, asthma exacerbation) occurred in approximately half as many fluticasone propionate-treated patients (13%-14%) as placebo-treated patients (24%). Compared with placebo users, patients treated with fluticasone propionate, 88 microg twice daily, had a 13% greater improvement in the mean proportion of symptom- and albuterol-free days (P = .02); asthma symptom scores and albuterol use were also significantly reduced. Patients treated with fluticasone propionate, 44 microg twice daily, had greater improvements than placebo-treated patients; however, differences did not reach statistical significance. At end point, the growth velocities of fluticasone propionate-treated patients were within the range of those of placebo-treated patients. No clinically relevant changes in 12-hour overnight urinary cortisol excretion were observed. CONCLUSION: Compared with placebo use, fluticasone propionate, 88 microg administered twice daily, significantly reduced asthma exacerbations, asthma symptoms, and rescue albuterol use and was well tolerated, with no clinically relevant systemic effects, as measured by growth velocity or 12-hour urinary cortisol excretion levels.     

Mometasone furoate: efficacy and safety in moderate asthma compared with beclomethasone dipropionate.

BACKGROUND: Mometasone furoate (MF) is a new inhaled glucocorticoid administered by dry powder inhaler (DPI). OBJECTIVE: MF-DPI was evaluated for safety and efficacy and compared with placebo DPI and beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) administered by metered dose inhaler (MDI) in the treatment of patients with moderate persistent asthma. METHODS: Eligible patients (n = 227), 13 to 75 years of age, maintained on inhaled glucocorticoids before entering the trial, were randomized to receive: MF-DPI, 100 microg, twice daily, MF-DPI, 200 microg, twice daily, BDP MDI, 168 microg, twice daily, or placebo in a 12-week, multicenter, double-blind study. RESULTS: At endpoint, FEV1 (primary efficacy variable) significantly improved for all three active treatments compared with placebo (P < .01, all comparisons). The response to MF-DPI, 200 microg, twice daily treatment was approximately twice as large as the response to MF-DPI, 100 microg, twice daily or BDP MDI treatment, although the differences between these groups did not reach statistical significance. Secondary efficacy variables including PEFR, asthma symptoms, nocturnal awakenings, and albuterol use showed similar trends. The MF-DPI, 100 microg, twice daily and BDP MDI, 168 microg, twice daily treatment groups produced comparable results for all efficacy variables. CONCLUSIONS: MF-DPI, 100 microg and 200 microg, twice daily were well-tolerated and significantly improved lung function and symptom control in the treatment of patients with moderate persistent asthma. In this study, MF-DPI, 200 microg, twice daily seemed to be the most effective dosage.     

Comparison of oral and inhaled metaproterenol for prevention of exercise-induced asthma

The effectiveness of inhaled versus oral metaproterenol in preventing exercise-induced asthma (EIA) was studied. Inhaled metaproterenol given 10 min before the exercise significantly reduced the degree of EIA in a group of twenty-four patients, and in 75% of them completely prevented it. The mean percentage decrease in FEV₁ was 6-5% with the inhaler and 30.1%, with placebo. When inhaled 1 hr before the exercise, metaproterenol was still better than placebo but its effectiveness was considerably lower. Metaproterenol tablets had a slight protective effect given I hr before, and none when administered 2 hr before exercise. There was no correlation between the protective effect against EIA and the bronchodilating effect obtained before exercise. Metaproterenol administered by metered-dose inhaler is a very effective prophylactic medication against clinically troublesome EIA, while metaproterenol tablets should not be recommended for this purpose.     

The safety and efficacy of nebulized levalbuterol compared with racemic albuterol and placebo in the treatment of asthma in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND: Limited dose-response information is available for nebulized beta2 -agonists, especially in young children. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of increasing doses of nebulized levalbuterol (Xopenex; the pure R-isomer of racemic albuterol) and racemic albuterol compared with placebo in the treatment of asthma in pediatric patients. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, crossover study, children (aged 3 to 11 years) with asthma (resting FEV1 50% to 80% of predicted normal [Polgar's] values) were treated with either levalbuterol, racemic albuterol, or placebo. Eligible subjects underwent a screening visit followed by 4 treatment visits. At each treatment visit, serial pulmonary function tests were completed before and after the treatment; plasma was collected to determine enantiomer levels, and safety was evaluated. RESULTS: Five 3- to 5-year-old patients and twenty-eight 6- to 11-year-old patients completed the study, and a total of 87 doses of levalbuterol were administered. In the 6- to 11-year-old group, all doses of levalbuterol were significantly greater than placebo in peak change and percent peak change in FEV1 and area under the FEV1 versus time curve (P <.05). The FEV1 values over the 8-hour study period were similar for levalbuterol 0.31 and 0.63 mg and racemic albuterol 2.5 mg and were greatest after levalbuterol 1.25 mg. Median plasma levels of R-albuterol depended on dose and were 0.4, 0.7, 1.2, and 1.0 after levalbuterol 0.31 mg, 0.63 mg, and 1.25 mg and racemic albuterol 2.5 mg, respectively. All patients in the 2.5-mg racemic albuterol arm had measurable plasma levels of S-albuterol, although S-albuterol levels were undetectable in most patients in the levalbuterol arms. In a few patients who received levalbuterol, S-albuterol levels were detected, which was likely because of the use of racemic albuterol as a concomitant medication. All active treatments were well tolerated. beta-Mediated changes in heart rate, potassium, and glucose were dose dependent for all active treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Levalbuterol caused a significantly greater increase in FEV1 than placebo, and FEV1 values were comparable with or better than those observed with racemic albuterol. beta-Mediated side effects were lower for an equipotent dose of levalbuterol when compared with racemic albuterol. Treatment with levalbuterol resulted in plasma levels that were dose dependent and had an approximate correlation with pharmacodynamic parameters.