Efficacy and safety of a new pressurised metered-dose inhaler formulation of budesonide/formoterol in children with asthma: a superiority and therapeutic equivalence study

AIM: This paediatric asthma study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a novel hydrofluoroalkane pressurised metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) formulation of budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide pMDI and budesonide/formoterol dry-powder inhaler (DPI). METHODS: The study was a 12-week, multinational, double-blind trial involving children (aged 6-11 years) with symptomatic asthma on inhaled corticosteroids (375-1000 microg/day), with a history of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and peak expiratory flow (PEF) > or =50% of predicted. Patients were randomised (two inhalations twice daily) to budesonide pMDI 100 microg, budesonide/formoterol DPI 80/4.5 microg or budesonide/formoterol pMDI 80/4.5 microg. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in morning PEF. RESULTS: Overall, 622 patients were randomised. Increases in morning PEF with budesonide/formoterol pMDI and budesonide/formoterol DPI were therapeutically equivalent (29.5 versus 30.2l/min, respectively; 95% confidence interval: -6.0 to 4.6; P=0.78, also confirmed by per-protocol analysis). Improvements in secondary efficacy endpoints with both budesonide/formoterol formulations were not significantly different. Significantly greater improvement was achieved with budesonide/formoterol pMDI versus budesonide pMDI for morning PEF (+9.6l/min; P<0.001) and other lung function parameters. The safety profile of budesonide/formoterol pMDI was favourable and similar to that of budesonide/formoterol DPI and budesonide pMDI. CONCLUSION: Budesonide/formoterol, administered via the therapeutically equivalent hydrofluoroalkane pMDI or DPI, is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for children with asthma.     

Budesonide and formoterol in a single inhaler improves asthma control compared with increasing the dose of corticosteroid in adults with mild-to-moderate asthma

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose budesonide/formoterol, 80 micro g/4.5 micro g, bid in a single inhaler (Symbicort Turbuhaler; AstraZeneca; Lund, Sweden) compared with an increased dose of budesonide, 200 micro g bid, in adult patients with mild-to-moderate asthma not fully controlled on low doses of inhaled corticosteroid alone. METHODS: All patients received budesonide, 100 micro g bid, during a 2-week run-in period. At the end of the run-in phase, 467 patients with a mean FEV(1) of 82% predicted received 12 weeks of treatment with budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler or budesonide alone in a higher dose. Patients kept daily records of their morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), nighttime and daytime symptom scores, and use of reliever medication. RESULTS: The increase in mean morning PEF-the primary efficacy measure-was significantly higher for budesonide/formoterol compared with budesonide alone (16.5 L/min vs 7.3 L/min, p = 0.002). Similarly, evening PEF was significantly greater in the budesonide/formoterol group (p < 0.001). In addition, the percentage of symptom-free days and asthma-control days (p = 0.007 and p = 0.002, respectively) were significantly improved in the budesonide/formoterol group. Budesonide/formoterol decreased the relative risk of an asthma exacerbation by 26% (p = 0.02) compared with budesonide alone. Adverse events were comparable between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: This study shows that in adult patients whose mild-to-moderate asthma is not fully controlled on low doses of inhaled corticosteroids, single-inhaler therapy with budesonide and formoterol provides greater improvements in asthma control than increasing the maintenance dose of inhaled corticosteroid.     

Budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler for maintenance and relief in mild-to-moderate asthma: a randomized, double-blind trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare a novel asthma management strategy--budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler for both maintenance therapy and symptom relief--with a higher dose of budesonide plus as-needed terbutaline. METHODS: This was a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study in patients with mild-to-moderate asthma (n = 697; mean age, 38 years [range, 11 to 79 years]; mean baseline FEV1, 75% of predicted; mean inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] dosage, 348 microg/d). Following a 2-week run-in period, all patients received two blinded, dry powder inhalers, one containing maintenance medication and one containing medication to be used as needed for the relief of symptoms. Patients were randomized to receive either budesonide/formoterol (80 microg/4.5 microg, two inhalations qd) for maintenance plus additional inhalations as needed for symptom relief, or budesonide (160 microg, two inhalations qd) for maintenance medication plus terbutaline (0.4 mg) as needed. The primary efficacy variable was morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). RESULTS: Patients receiving budesonide/formoterol showed greater improvements in morning PEF than patients receiving budesonide (increases of 34.5 L/min vs 9.5 L/min, respectively; p < 0.001). The risk of having a severe exacerbation (hospitalization/emergency department [ED] treatment, oral steroids for asthma, or a > or = 30% decrease from baseline in morning PEF on 2 consecutive days) was 54% lower with budesonide/formoterol vs budesonide (p = 0.0011). Budesonide/formoterol patients experienced 90% fewer hospitalizations/ED treatments due to asthma than budesonide patients (1 vs 10, respectively; p = 0.026). The increased efficacy with budesonide/formoterol was achieved with less ICS than was used in the budesonide group (mean dose, 240 microg/d vs 320 microg/d, respectively) and with 77% fewer oral steroid treatment days vs budesonide (114 days vs 498 days, respectively). Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide/formoterol for both maintenance and relief improves asthma control with a lower steroid load compared with a higher dose of budesonide plus terbutaline.     

Improved asthma control with budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler, compared with budesonide alone.

Budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler was compared with budesonide alone, and with concurrent administration of budesonide and formoterol from separate inhalers, in patients with asthma, not controlled with inhaled glucocorticosteroids alone. In this 12-week, double-blind, randomized, double-dummy study, 362 adult asthmatics (forced expiratory volume in one second 73.8% of predicted, inhaled glucocorticosteroid dose 960 microg x day(-1)) received single inhaler budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort Turbuhaler) 160/4.5 microg, two inhalations b.i.d., or corresponding treatment with budesonide, or budesonide plus formoterol via separate inhalers. There was a greater increase in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) with single-inhaler (35.7 L x min(-1)) and separate-inhaler (32.0 L x min(-1)) budesonide and formoterol, compared with budesonide alone (0.2 L x min(-1); p<0.001, both comparisons); the effect was apparent after 1 day (p<0.001 versus budesonide, both comparisons). Similarly, evening PEF, use of rescue medication, total asthma symptom scores and percentage of symptom-free days improved more with both single inhaler and separate inhaler therapy than with budesonide alone, as did asthma control days (approximately 15% more, p<0.001 versus budesonide, both comparisons, with a marked increase in the first week). All treatments were well tolerated and the adverse event profile was similar in all three treatment groups. It is concluded that single inhaler therapy with budesonide and formoterol is a clinically effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients with asthma that is not fully controlled by inhaled glucocorticosteroids alone.     

Inflammatory and functional effects of increasing asthma treatment with formoterol or double dose budesonide

Adding a long-acting beta(2)-agonist to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) for asthma treatment is better than increasing ICS dose in improving clinical status, although there is no consensus about the impact of this regimen on inflammation. In this double-blind, randomized, parallel group study, asthmatics with moderate to severe disease used budesonide (400 mcg/day) for 5 weeks (run-in period); then they were randomized to use budesonide (800 mcg/day - BUD group) or budesonide plus formoterol (400 mcg and 24 mcg/day, respectively - FORMO group) for 9 weeks (treatment period). Home PEF measurements, symptom daily reporting, spirometry, sputum induction (for differential cell counts and sputum cell cultures), and hypertonic saline bronchial challenge test were performed before and after treatments. TNF-alpha, IL-4 and eotaxin-2 levels in the sputum and cell culture supernatants were determined. Morning and night PEF values increased in the FORMO group during the treatment period (p<0.01), from 435+/-162 to 489+/-169 and 428+/-160 to 496+/-173 L/min, respectively. The rate of exacerbations in the FORMO group was lower than in the BUD group (p<0.05). Neutrophil counts in sputum increased in both groups (p<0.05) and leukocyte viability after 48h-culture increased in the FORMO group (p<0.05). No other parameter changed significantly in either group. This study showed that adding formoterol to budesonide improved home PEF and provided protection from exacerbations, although increase of leukocyte viability in cell culture may be a matter of concern and needs further investigation.     

Once-daily dosing with budesonide/formoterol compared with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol and once-daily budesonide in adults with mild to moderate asthma

Adherence to maintenance therapy is often poor in patients with asthma. Simplifying dosing regimens has the potential to improve both adherence and asthma-related morbidity. In this 12-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study, 617 patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma (mean forced expiratory volume in 1s [FEV1] 78.5% predicted) who were not optimally controlled on inhaled corticosteroids (200-500 microg/day) were randomized to once-daily budesonide/formoterol (80/4.5 microg, 2 inhalations in the evening), twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (80/4.5 microg, 1 inhalation), or a corresponding dose of budesonide once-daily (200 microg, 1 inhalation in the evening). All patients received budesonide (100 microg twice daily) during a 2-week run-in. Changes in mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) were similar for od budesonide/formoterol (23.4 l/min) and twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (24.1 l/min), and both were greater than with budesonide (5.5 l/min; both P<0.001). Evening PEF, symptom-free days, reliever-free days, and asthma control days were improved with budesonide/formoterol therapy vs. budesonide (P<0.05 vs. budesonide for all variables). All treatments were well tolerated. Budesonide/formoterol administered once daily in the evening is a convenient treatment regimen that is as effective in improving asthma control as twice-daily dosing in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma.     

Efficacy and safety of high-dose budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort) compared with budesonide administered either concomitantly with formoterol or alone in patients with persistent symptomatic asthma

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 microg, two inhalations bd, is an effective and well-tolerated maintenance therapy for patients not controlled on inhaled corticosteroids alone. The authors assessed the efficacy and safety of a higher dose of budesonide/formoterol in patients with persistent symptomatic asthma. METHODS: This was a 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy randomized study. Budesonide/formoterol 320/9 microg, two inhalations bd (1280/36 microg/day), was compared with corresponding doses of budesonide during weeks 1-12 and budesonide plus formoterol via separate inhalers during weeks 1-24. Efficacy was assessed during weeks 1-12; the primary variable was morning PEF. Safety was assessed over weeks 1-24. RESULTS: Patients (n=456; aged 12-79 years) had a mean reversibility in FEV1 of 28% and mean pre-study inhaled corticosteroid dose of 1038 microg/day. Mean morning PEF increased by 37 L/min and 36 L/min with budesonide/formoterol and budesonide plus formoterol, respectively, versus an increase of 5 L/min with budesonide (P<0.001 for both vs. budesonide). Budesonide/formoterol increased time to first mild exacerbation (P<0.005) versus budesonide. Budesonide/formoterol and budesonide plus formoterol had similar efficacy. All treatments were well tolerated and the incidence of class-related adverse events was similarly low in all groups. Changes in serum potassium and plasma cortisol were comparable across treatments. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose budesonide/formoterol (320/9 microg, two inhalations bd) is effective and well tolerated in patients with persistent symptomatic asthma. The findings also support the safety of regular high-dose formoterol (36 microg/day).     

Budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler versus inhaled corticosteroids alone in the treatment of asthma

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy (expressed as effect on lung function) and tolerability of Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler) in children with asthma. This was a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter trial. After a 2-4-week run-in period, 286 asthmatic children (177 boys, 109 girls; mean age, 11 years; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV(1)), 75% predicted normal), previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids (average dose 548 microg/day), were randomized to 12 weeks' treatment with either budesonide/formoterol 80/4.5 microg, two inhalations twice daily (n = 148), or an equivalent dose of budesonide 100 microg, two inhalations twice daily (n = 138). Efficacy variables included morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), spirometery, asthma symptoms, and use of rescue medication (beta(2)-agonists). Serial FEV(1) assessments were carried out on a subgroup of children (budesonide/formoterol, n = 41; budesonide, n = 40) at randomization and at week 12. Relative to baseline, morning PEF (primary variable) increased to a significantly greater extent with budesonide/formoterol than with budesonide alone (7.22% predicted normal vs 3.45% predicted normal; P < 0.001). Evening PEF also increased significantly with budesonide/formoterol (6.13% predicted normal vs. 2.73% predicted normal; P < 0.001), as did mean FEV(1) and serial FEV(1) measured over 12 hr (both P < 0.05). Similar improvements in asthma symptoms and rescue medication use were observed in both groups. The two treatment groups were similar in terms of their adverse-event profile and rates of discontinuation. Budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler provided rapid improvements in PEF and FEV(1) compared to inhaled budesonide alone. These improvements were sustained throughout the study period. Budesonide/formoterol was well-tolerated in children with moderate persistent asthma.     

布地奈德／福莫特罗联合孟鲁司特钠治疗咳嗽变异型哮喘的疗效观察

目的观察布地奈德／福莫特罗（信必可）联合孟鲁司特钠（顺尔宁）治疗成人咳嗽变异型哮喘的疗效。方法89例患者随机分成3组,治疗组吸入布地奈德／福莫特罗及服用孟鲁司特钠。对照组2组分别吸入布地奈德／福莫特罗或服用孟鲁司特钠。结果3组治疗后的症状积分及肺功能较治疗前均有显著改善。且3组治疗后的症状积分及肺功能比较,治疗组优于布地奈德／福莫特罗组、孟鲁司特钠组;经统计学处理,差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论布地奈德／福莫特罗与孟鲁司特钠联合应用在治疗咳嗽变异性哮喘的疗效优于单用布地奈德／福莫特罗、孟鲁司特钠。     

Comparison of fluticasone propionate-salmeterol combination therapy and montelukast in patients who are symptomatic on short-acting beta(2)-agonists alone.

The objective of this study was to determine whether initial maintenance therapy for the treatment of inflammation and bronchoconstriction associated with persistent asthma is more effective with a combination product (100 microg of fluticasone propionate and 50 microg of salmeterol [FSC]) administered twice daily through the Diskus device (GlaxoWellcome, Research Triangle Park, NC) or with montelukast at 10 mg once daily. A 12-wk, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter study was conducted with 423 patients 15 yr of age and older with asthma and who were symptomatic while receiving short-acting beta(2)-agonists alone. At end point, FSC resulted in significantly greater increases in morning predose FEV(1) (0.54 +/- 0.03 vs. 0.27 +/- 0.03 L), morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) (89.9 +/- 6.7 vs. 34.2 +/- 4.7 L/min), evening PEF (69.9 +/- 5.8 vs. 31.1 +/- 4.5 L/min), the percentage of symptom-free days (48.9 +/- 2.9 vs. 21.7 +/- 2.5%), the percentage of rescue-free days (53.0 +/- 2.8 vs. 26.2 +/- 2.5%), and the percentage of nights with no awakenings (23.0 +/- 2.5 vs. 15.5+/-2.4%) compared with montelukast (p < or = 0.001, all comparisons). FSC significantly reduced asthma symptom scores (-1.0 +/- 0.1 vs. -0.6 +/- 0.1), rescue albuterol use (-3.3 +/- 0.2 vs. -1.9 +/- 0.2 puffs/d), and the number of exacerbations (0 vs. 11) compared with montelukast (p < 0.001). Both treatments were well tolerated. In summary, treatment of the two main components of asthma (inflammation and bronchoconstriction) with fluticasone propionate and salmeterol in a combination product was a more effective initial maintenance treatment strategy than treatment with montelukast, a single-mediator antagonist.     

布地奈德/福莫特罗联合孟鲁司特钠治疗咳嗽变异型哮喘的疗效观察

目的 观察布地余德/福莫特罗(信必可)联合孟鲁司特钠(顺尔宁)治疗成人咳嗽变异型哮喘的疗效.方法 89例患者随机分成3组,治疗组吸入布地奈德/福莫特罗及服用孟鲁司特钠.对照组2组分别吸入布地奈德/福莫特罗或服用孟鲁司特钠.结果 3组治疗后的症状积分及肺功能较治疗前均有显著改善.且3组治疗后的症状积分及肺功能比较,治疗组...     

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

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

Reduction of eosinophilic inflammation in the airways of patients with asthma using montelukast

OBJECTIVE: Leukotrienes (LTs) are involved in airway eosinophilic inflammation in patients with asthma. We examined the effects of a cysteinyl LT 1-receptor antagonist, montelukast, on sputum eosinophil levels, and the correlation between sputum eosinophils and bronchodilatation in patients with asthma. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, crossover study. SETTING: University hospital and private hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-nine patients with mild-to-moderate asthma. INTERVENTIONS: Montelukast, 10 mg, and placebo tablet, once daily, each for 4 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: Sputum eosinophils analyzed using hypertonic saline solution-induced sputum and airway hyperresponsiveness to histamine were evaluated before and after treatment. In addition, morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms, and peripheral blood eosinophil levels were assessed. RESULTS: The percentage of eosinophils in sputum decreased from 24.6 +/- 12.3% at baseline to 15.1 +/- 11.8% after montelukast treatment, for a change of - 9.5 +/- 12.7% (n = 20). During placebo administration, the percentage of eosinophils fell from 21.3 +/- 12.1% to 21.0 +/- 11.5%, resulting in a decrease of - 0.3 +/- 10.8% (n = 20). There was a statistically significant difference in the change in sputum eosinophil levels between these two periods (p < 0.005). The number of peripheral blood eosinophils also significantly decreased after montelukast treatment (314.1 +/- 237.6/mL) compared with placebo (413.1 +/- 232.1/mL; p < 0.005, n = 21). Although morning and evening PEF values were significantly improved from baseline after montelukast treatment (p < 0.01, n = 20), asthma symptoms and airway responsiveness to histamine were not significantly altered. Furthermore, there was no significant correlation between the decrease in sputum eosinophils and the increase in PEF. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that montelukast has anti-inflammatory effects on the airway in patients with asthma, and that its bronchodilatory effect is not solely dependent on a decrease in airway eosinophilia.     

A randomized open-label comparative study of montelukast versus theophylline added to inhaled corticosteroid in asthmatic children.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are widely used in combination with other classes of drugs for treatment of childhood asthma. The efficacy and the safety of montelukast added to low-dose ICS therapy were compared with those of sustained-release theophylline added to low-dose ICS therapy in asthmatic children in the present study. METHODS: Following the 2-week run-in period, 6-to 14-year old patients receiving treatment with ICSs were randomized to treatment for 4 weeks with either montelukast 5 mg once daily or sustained release theophylline 5-8 mg/kg (dry syrup) or 100-200 mg (tablet) twice daily. Patients also received a fixed dose of ICS throughout the run-in and treatment periods. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in peak expiratory flow (PEF) at Week 2. RESULTS: A significant increase in morning PEF was observed in the add-on montelukast group as compared with the add-on theophylline group at Week 2 (change from baseline of 22.8 L/minvs. 8.7 L/min; p = 0.041 for between-group difference) and at Week 4 (31.0 L/minvs. 9.8 L/min; p = 0.012). A significant increase in evening PEF was observed in the add-on montelukast group as compared with the add-on theophylline group at Week 4 (24.7 L/minvs. 8.7 L/min; p = 0.027). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups in incidences of clinical and laboratory adverse experiences. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that montelukast added to low-dose ICS is an effective and safe option for the treatment of asthma in children.     

Comparison of the effects of salmeterol and formoterol in patients with severe asthma

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Several studies have demonstrated the superiority of salmeterol and formoterol to either regular treatment with albuterol or placebo. However, to date there have been no trials comparing the efficacy of salmeterol and formoterol in patients with severe asthma. DESIGN: We undertook a randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study to compare 4 weeks of treatment with inhaled formoterol (12 microg twice daily) or salmeterol (50 microg twice daily) in patients with severe asthma whose conditions were not being adequately controlled by therapy with high doses of inhaled corticosteroids (i.e., > or = 1,500 microg daily) or with regular oral corticosteroid treatment. Morning pretreatment peak expiratory flow (PEF) during the last 14 days of the treatment period was the primary outcome variable. Patients recorded morning and evening pretreatment PEF, daytime and nighttime symptom scores, and any use of rescue medication. Spirometry and bronchial reversibility were performed after each treatment. RESULTS: Forty-two nonsmoking patients (29 women; mean age, 45 +/- 2 years; mean [+/- SEM] FEV(1), 61.8 +/- 3.4% of predicted) took part in the trial, and 27 patients completed the trial. The mean morning PEF was greater in patients receiving formoterol (mean increase, 14.4 L/min; 95% confidence interval [CI]. 0.2 to 28.6) or salmeterol (mean increase, 14.8 L/min; 95% CI, 0.5 to 29.1) compared with those receiving placebo, but there was no difference between these treatments. There were no significant treatment effects for any of the secondary outcome variables (i.e., FEV(1,) FVC, mean evening PEF, mean daytime symptom score, or nighttime symptom score). CONCLUSION: We conclude that the long-acting beta(2)-agonists salmeterol and formoterol improve morning PEF in patients with severe asthma, but that there is no difference in efficacy between the two drugs.     

Efficacy and safety of formoterol Turbuhaler when added to inhaled corticosteroid treatment in children with asthma

This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study was conducted in 302 children aged 6-11 years with asthma not optimally treated with inhaled corticosteroids alone. Patients continued with their existing dose of inhaled corticosteroids and in addition received placebo, formoterol 4.5 microg or formoterol 9 microg b.i.d., for 12 weeks (all delivered via Turbuhaler). Terbutaline was available as reliever medication. The primary efficacy variable was change from baseline in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF); secondary efficacy variables included forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV(1)), serial PEF measured over 12 hr, evening PEF, asthma symptom score, and quality of life. Compared with placebo, formoterol 4.5 microg and 9 microg improved morning PEF by 8 l/min (P = 0.035) and 11 l/min (P = 0.0045), respectively. Evening PEF and FEV(1) were also significantly increased compared with placebo, with no statistically significant difference between formoterol doses. Lung-function improvements compared with placebo were greater in the middle of the day. Twelve-hour average serial PEF after 3 months increased by 24 l/min (95% CI, 9, 39 l/min) in the formoterol 9-microg group, and by 14 l/min (95% CI, 0, 29 l/min) in the formoterol 4.5-microg group. The incidence of severe exacerbations in both formoterol groups was numerically lower than in the placebo group, indicating that formoterol may have the potential to improve exacerbation control in children. Both formoterol doses were well-tolerated, and tolerance to the drug's bronchodilator effect was not observed. Formoterol provided sustained improvements in lung function and was well-tolerated in children with asthma suboptimally treated with inhaled corticosteroids alone.     

Action of budesonide on asthmatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Effects on directly and indirectly acting bronchoconstrictors

We have investigated the effects of inhaled budesonide on the bronchial responsiveness to both directly and indirectly acting spasmogens in man. Following treatment with budesonide or placebo for three weeks in a double-blind, crossover trial with a three-week washout, the response to histamine and bradykinin was determined in ten patients with mild asthma. After treatment with budesonide, the response to both inhaled histamine and bradykinin was decreased when compared with placebo. The PD35 histamine was increased by 1.95 doubling doses and PD35 bradykinin by 2.1 doubling doses. Daily (PEF) recordings were significantly increased during budesonide therapy, the morning PEF by 34.8 +/- 14.1 L/min and evening by 50.3 +/- 23.1 L/min. Baseline laboratory lung function on the study days was not altered by budesonide nor were symptom records altered significantly. Inhaled budesonide therefore inhibits to the same extent the exaggerated response to both directly acting histamine and bradykinin which acts through airway nerves.     

Addition of montelukast versus double dose of inhaled budesonide in moderate persistent asthma

BACKGROUND: Although current guidelines suggest the use of inhaled corticosteroids as the first line therapy in persistent asthma, the concerns about high-dose corticosteroids may limit their usage. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of inhaled budesonide plus oral montelukast versus a double dose of inhaled budesonide. METHODOLOGY: Thirty patients with moderate asthma took part in the study. Following a 2-week run in period, the patients were randomized into two groups to receive 400 microg/day of inhaled budesonide plus 10 mg/day of montelukast (BUD + M group) or 800 microg/day of inhaled budesonide (high BUD group). The patients were evaluated at 2-week intervals (during a total treatment period of 6 weeks) for symptom scores, asthma exacerbations, lung function, use of short-acting beta2 agonist, blood eosinophil counts and adverse events. RESULTS: At the end of the study, morning and daytime symptom scores were significantly reduced within the groups. Although there was a significant decrease in the frequency of short-acting beta2 agonist use in the BUD + M group, the decrease in the high BUD group was not significant. During the study period, no patient in either group experienced an asthma exacerbation. Blood eosinophil levels significantly declined in both the BUD + M (0.87 +/- 0.31%) and high BUD groups (0.67 +/- 0.29%) as compared with baseline levels (BUD + M = 2.60 +/- 0.65%, high BUD group = 2.60 +/- 0.47%; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the addition of montelukast to low-dose inhaled budesonide is as effective as a double dose of inhaled budesonide in asthma control.     

Nocturnal asthma: slow-release terbutaline versus slow-release theophylline therapy

In a double-blind cross-over study, the effects of slow release (S-R) terbutaline tablets (b.i.d. 0.25 mg/kg per day) and S-R theophylline (5.31 mg/kg morning and 10.62 mg/kg evening) were compared in eleven patients with nocturnal asthma. On day seven of each treatment period, drug serum concentrations and peak expiratory flow (PEF) were measured every 2h over a 24-h period. During daytime, terbutaline concentrations ranged from 1.6-14.1 (median 4.5) microgram/l and during the night from 2.1-18.7 (median 4.9) micron/l. Theophylline concentrations ranged from 3.9-24.3 (median 11.5) mg/l during the day and from 3.3-20.9 (median 10.4) mg/l at night. Nocturnal wheezing occurred during theophylline treatment in four patients 7 times and during terbutaline treatment in six patients 22 times. Daytime PEF values were 472 +/- 161 l/min during theophylline therapy versus 445 +/- 169 l/min during terbutaline therapy (p less than 0.05). In the night and early morning there was no significant difference between PEF values with the two treatment forms. During theophylline treatment, fewer inhalations of beta 2-sympathomimetics were used, and there were fewer side effects. One patient experienced severe asthmatic attacks during the terbutaline treatment period. The patients preferred theophylline for the treatment of nocturnal asthma.     

咳嗽变异性哮喘患者疗效与布地奈德福莫特罗疗程的相关性研究

背景 咳嗽变异性哮喘(CVA)是引起成年人慢性咳嗽的主要原因,布地奈德福莫特罗作为治疗此病的重要药物,其最佳疗程目前尚无统一定论,如何在保证治疗安全性的同时尽可能使患者获益是当前临床研究热点和难点.目的 探讨CVA患者疗效与布地奈德福莫特罗疗程的相关性.方法 选取廊坊市人民医院门诊2018年8月至2020年3月收治的C...