Toward a simplified measure of asthma severity for applied research

There is no universally accepted and validated measure of asthma severity. For community research, clinical tests are too costly, and epidemiological assessments provide inadequate data on severity. Symptom measures may offer a practical alternative. This study assessed psychometric properties of symptom ratings of 91 asthmatic children. Reliability and validity of scales created from these items were examined. A sum scale of symptom ratings was internally consistent, reliable across time, and associated with concurrent health indices. This scale may be a practical measure of severity for use in community-based research.

The pharmacological basis for the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis and non-allergic rhinitis with topical corticosteroids

The currently available respiratory topical corticosteroids are all effective at reducing the nasal symptoms of itch, sneezing, rhinorrhoea and obstruction associated with allergic rhinitis. The mechanism of action of corticosteroids is related to their anti-inflammatory activities. They have been documented to prevent fluid exudation and reduce the number of circulating inflammatory cells, including lymphocytes, mast cells, basophils, eosinophils, macrophages, and neutrophils. This occurs through multiple mechanisms, e.g. eosinophil infiltration is suppressed by preventing cytokine production, reducing local mechanisms of tissue infiltration, and decreasing eosinophil survival. Furthermore, corticosteroids also reduce preformed and newly-generated mediators (e.g. histamine, tryptase, prostanoids, leukotrienes), and inhibit production of cytokines and chemokines by inflammatory cells (e.g. IL-1 through IL-6, IL-8, RANTES, TNF-alpha, IFN-gamma and GM-CSF). The currently available corticosteroids differ pharmacologically. Fluticasone propionate appears to have the greatest affinity for the glucocorticoid receptor, and binds more quickly and dissociates more slowly from the receptor compared with other corticosteroids, suggesting a more prolonged duration of action. Its increased specificity for respiratory tissue may lead to greater potency with less potential for systemic adverse effects. Fluticasone propionate has been compared with other corticosteroids in animal models for relative topical and systemic potency, and according to these data, it has the most favourable risk-benefit ratio.

Fluticasone propionate compared with theophylline for mild-to-moderate asthma

BACKGROUND

The inhaled corticosteroid, fluticasone propionate, was compared with the oral bronchodilator theophylline in the maintenance treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of twice-daily inhaled fluticasone propionate, 50 micrograms, and fluticasone propionate, 100 micrograms, with that of theophylline in the maintenance treatment of mild-to-moderate asthma.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, 353 adult and adolescent patients with asthma inadequately controlled with inhaled beta-agonist therapy alone received fluticasone propionate, 50 micrograms, or fluticasone propionate, 100 micrograms, by metered-dose inhaler; theophylline capsules; or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. Only inhaled albuterol was permitted as needed for acute symptoms.

RESULTS

Both fluticasone propionate groups had a significantly greater probability of remaining in the study (ie, meeting asthma stability criteria) than did either the theophylline or placebo group (P < or = .008); 39% and 51% in the theophylline and placebo groups, respectively, were withdrawn due to lack of treatment efficacy compared with 14% and 21% in the fluticasone propionate, 50 micrograms, and fluticasone propionate, 100 micrograms, groups. Both fluticasone propionate groups experienced significantly greater improvement in FEV1 and PEF compared with patients in the theophylline or placebo group (P < or = .004). The incidence of potentially drug-related adverse events was significantly greater in the theophylline group (25%) than in the placebo group (11%) (P = .031), while there were no differences between placebo and fluticasone propionate, 50 micrograms, (18%) or fluticasone propionate 100 micrograms, (22%).

CONCLUSION

Twice daily treatment with inhaled fluticasone propionate 50 micrograms or 100 micrograms was significantly more effective than theophylline in the treatment of mild-to-moderate asthma.

Double-strength beclomethasone dipropionate (84 micrograms/spray) aqueous nasal spray in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

The use of intranasally administered corticosteroid sprays is an established treatment option for seasonal allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study, 438 patients with moderate to severe symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis were treated for 4 weeks with double-strength beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) aqueous nasal spray (84 micrograms/spray: BDP-ds), once daily; regular-strength BDP (42 micrograms/spray: BDP-rs), twice daily; high-strength BDP (336 micrograms/spray: BDP-hs), once daily; or placebo. BDP-hs was included as a safety comparison group. All treatments were given as two sprays per nostril.

RESULTS

Physician-rated nasal symptom scores were significantly improved in all three active treatment groups compared with those of the placebo group within the initial 3 days of treatment. Improvement was maintained throughout the 4-week treatment period. BDP-ds and BDP-rs were equivalent at all time points. The BDP-ds, BDP-rs, and BDP-hs groups had greater numbers of patients with a good or excellent therapeutic response at end point than the placebo group. All treatments were well-tolerated, and no unexpected adverse events were reported. No effects on laboratory evaluations or vital signs were evident for any treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study show that BDP-ds given once a day and BDP-rs given twice a day in the same total daily dose are comparably safe and effective in the treatment of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray compared with terfenadine tablets in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Comparative studies with topical corticosteroids and antihistamines for treatment of allergic rhinitis have not always demonstrated clear distinctions between the two on the basis of therapeutic efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray with those of terfenadine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

Three hundred forty-eight patients with allergic rhinitis were given fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (200 micrograms once daily), terfenadine tablets (60 mg twice daily), or placebo for 4 weeks in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study.

RESULTS

Clinician-rated total nasal symptom scores after 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks of therapy and patient-rated total nasal symptom scores throughout treatment were significantly (p <0.05) lower in the fluticasone propionate group compared with the terfenadine group or the placebo group. Terfenadine was not statistically different from placebo on the basis of clinician-related nasal symptom scores, except for sneezing. Total nasal airflow, measured by rhinomanometry, significantly (p <0.05) improved in the fluticasone propionate group compared with the terfenadine group or the placebo group. More fluticasone propionate-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients had reduced nasal mucosal eosinophil counts after 4 weeks of therapy (p <0.05). No serious or unusual drug-related adverse events were reported. Morning plasma cortisol concentrations after 4 weeks of therapy did not differ among groups.

CONCLUSION

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray is more effective than terfenadine tablets for treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Comparative outdoor study of the efficacy, onset and duration of action, and safety of cetirizine, loratadine, and placebo for seasonal allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Cetirizine, a new once-daily highly specific H1-antagonist, has been shown in conventional studies to be efficacious in the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria.

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy, duration and onset of action, and safety of cetirizine, 10 mg once daily, was compared with that of loratadine, 10 mg once daily, and placebo in a field study of patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel, double-dummy study conducted over 2 days in spring allergy season at outdoor parks in San Diego and Iowa City. Study medication was administered at 10:00 AM on both days. After screening, eligible patients completed rhinitis symptom diaries in the park hourly from 7:30 to 9:30 AM (baseline); at 10:30 AM and hourly from 11:00 AM to 4:00 PM (period I); at 6:00, 8:00, and 10:00 PM at home (period II); and the next day in the park hourly from 8:00 to 10:00 AM (period III), and from 11:00 AM to 4:00 PM (period IV). Major and total symptom complex scores, global efficacy and overall satisfaction, and adverse events were assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 279 patients (140 men and 139 women; mean age, 29 years) randomized to treatment, 278 were included in the efficacy analysis. Cetirizine produced significantly greater mean reductions than loratadine or placebo in major symptom complex severity scores at all periods (p < or = 0.05), except period I for placebo. Cetirizine also produced mean reductions in total symptom complex severity scores that were superior to loratadine at every evaluation period (p < 0.05) and were statistically different from placebo at period II (p < 0.01). A rapid onset of action was observed with cetirizine, as was a better response pattern in the patient global assessment of efficacy compared with loratadine. Study medications were well tolerated; no patient stopped treatment because of side effects. The incidence of somnolence with cetirizine was 13% versus 2% with placebo (p < 0.05); headache occurred more frequently with loratadine (23%) than with cetirizine (11%, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Cetirizine relieved rhinitis symptoms more effectively and quickly than loratadine and placebo in this field study of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Both active agents were generally well tolerated.

The accuracy of environmental tobacco smoke exposure measures among asthmatic children

This study determined the reliability and validity of parent-reported measures of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure among 91 asthmatic children. Test-retest reliability assessments were conducted for environmental, biological and parent-reported measures of ETS exposure. All measures except a urine cotinine assay resulted in satisfactory levels of reliability. The parent-reported measures of ETS exposure were compared to the environmental filter measure of nicotine as well as submitted to a construct validity test. Parent-reported home exposure to ETS proved moderately and significantly correlated to the filter measure. Approximately 80% of all hypothetical constructs agreed with the observed relationships for convergent, divergent and discriminant validity. It was concluded that middle class Caucasian parents' reports of their asthmatic child's residential ETS exposure are reliable and valid. These parent-reported measures should be valuable tools for epidemiological investigations and for clinical programs designed to reduce asthmatic children's residential exposure to ETS.

A pharmacologic continuum in the treatment of rhinorrhea: the clinician as economist

The economics of medications are now of great concern to health-care providers. Pharmacoeconomic issues are by no means simple, and yet, ironically, they assume greater importance in prescribing for modest disorders like rhinorrhea than for life-threatening conditions. The therapeutic continuum of quality and cost becomes foreshortened, and safety is an additional concern. Choosing the appropriate medication for rhinorrhea, then, can pose a challenge to the clinician, just as choosing a vital medication. This paper reviews the usage, quality, and cost of major therapies for the rhinorrhea that occurs secondary to various conditions, including nasal steroids, antihistamines and anticholinergics, and discusses the role of the clinician in factoring costs into therapy.

Cetirizine in patients with seasonal rhinitis and concomitant asthma: prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study explored the safety and efficacy of cetirizine for treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma.

METHODS

Daily treatment for 6 weeks with cetirizine 10 mg (93 patients) was compared with placebo treatment (93 patients) in a randomized, double-blind parallel study of patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma. This multicenter study was started just before onset of the fall pollen season. Rhinitis and asthma symptoms were assessed twice daily; spirometry was performed weekly.

RESULTS

Placebo-treated patients experienced a worsening of rhinitis symptoms from baseline throughout the study, whereas cetirizine-treated patients had a significant improvement in rhinitis symptoms at week 1, which was maintained after onset of the pollen season. Asthma symptoms in the cetirizine group improved from baseline at week 1; symptoms were significantly better than in the placebo group for 5 of 6 weeks of the study. Pulmonary function did not worsen in patients taking cetirizine or placebo; there were no differences between treatments as determined by spirometry. Albuterol use was less frequent in the cetirizine-treated patients for every week of the study, but differences did not reach significance. Pseudoephedrine use was similar in both groups. More cetirizine-treated patients (90%) completed the trial than did placebo-treated patients (74%). Both treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Cetirizine 10 mg daily is safe and effective in relieving both upper and lower respiratory tract symptoms in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis and concomitant asthma.

An overview of current pharmacotherapy in perennial rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Individuals with rhinitis experience significant morbidity due to their disease. Research and clinical care to reduce this suffering are important.

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacological agents that have been developed for the treatment of perennial rhinitis.

METHOD

Literature review of human studies.

RESULTS

Medication classes include antihistamines, decongestants, anticholinergics, cromolyn sodium, and corticosteroids. These vary in regard to their pharmacology, efficacy, and adverse effects. Compliance and cost issues are also critical components of the therapeutic regimen.

CONCLUSION

Carefully chosen pharmacotherapy based on an understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease, knowledge of the potential of medications, and commitment to an ongoing patient/physician education and monitoring program can lead to improved well-being for individuals with perennial rhinitis.

Histamine levels and nasal cytology in children with chronic otitis media and rhinitis

OBJECTIVE

Nasal and middle ear diseases are frequent health problems for young children. In some of these patients, allergic reactions may be contributing factors. The objective of this study was to determine whether the histamine level in nasal mucosal scrapings may be used as a marker for this subset of children.

METHODS

A total of 50 children, aged 2 through 7 years, was categorized into five groups of ten subjects as: normal, allergic rhinitis, nonallergic rhinitis, allergic with otitis media and nonallergic with otitis media by history, physical examination, allergy skin testing, nasal cytology, and tympanometry. Nasal mucosal scrapings were obtained using the Rhino-probe technique. Eosinophils, basophilic cells, neutrophils, and bacteria in nasal cytograms were quantified. Histamine levels were measured by radioimmunoassay, the values normalized to the total protein content assayed by enzyme-linked immunoassay, and expressed in pcg/micrograms of total protein.

RESULTS

The mean histamine level for each group was: normal = 0.20, allergic rhinitis = 10.14, nonallergic rhinitis = 0.13, allergic with otitis media = 5.34, nonallergic with otitis media = 0.24 pcg/micrograms of total protein. Mean levels of histamine were statistically significantly higher in the allergic groups than in the nonallergic and normal groups (P < .05). Allergic groups had significantly more eosinophils and basophilic cells in the nasal cytograms than the nonallergic groups. By contrast, the cytograms of children with nonallergic rhinitis and nonallergic otitis had significantly more neutrophils than the normal and allergic groups.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that measuring histamine in nasal mucosal scrapings could be useful in the evaluation of young children with rhinitis and otitis and in determining which patients may have allergic disease.

Nasal cytological changes following pharmacological intervention

Symptoms of allergic rhinitis are associated with increased numbers of inflammatory cells in the nasal mucosa. The effects of fluticasone propionate on the nasal mucosal cells of patients with symptomatic allergic rhinitis were evaluated in seven multicentre, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, randomised studies. In three seasonal allergic rhinitis studies, significantly more patients receiving fluticasone propionate had a decrease in nasal eosinophils following treatment compared with patients receiving placebo. Similarly, more patients receiving fluticasone propionate had a decrease in nasal basophilic cells, but differences from placebo were not significant in all studies. Nearly identical results were observed in two 24-week perennial allergic rhinitis studies: significantly more patients receiving fluticasone propionate or beclomethasone dipropionate had a decrease in nasal eosinophils compared with patients receiving placebo. Furthermore, a higher percentage of patients receiving corticosteroids also had a decrease in the number of basophilic cells. In two separate seasonal allergic rhinitis studies, significantly more patients receiving fluticasone propionate had a decrease in nasal eosinophils compared with patients receiving terfenadine or astemizole, respectively. The decrease in nasal basophilic cells was also significantly greater with fluticasone propionate compared with astemizole. Inhibition of mediator release from eosinophilic and basophilic cells has also been demonstrated in patients receiving fluticasone propionate compared with patients receiving antihistamines. The results of these studies suggest that the therapeutic benefits of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray in the treatment of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis may be related to its ability to reduce nasal mucosal inflammatory cells and to inhibit local mediator activity.

A dose-ranging study of the efficacy and safety of azelastine nasal spray in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis with an acute model

BACKGROUND

Oral azelastine, a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory respiratory investigational drug has demonstrated activity in the treatment of allergic rhinitis and asthma with a good safety profile.

METHODS

Azelastine nasal spray was compared with sustained-release oral chlorpheniramine maleate and placebo for efficacy and safety in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in a double-dummy, two-center, 2-day, double-blind, randomized, dose-ranging, parallel-groups, onset and duration of action study. Two hundred sixty-four subjects reported to an outdoor park on Saturday morning during the height of the fall pollen season and remained there for 8 hours that day and the next to ensure maximal exposure to seasonal aeroallergens. Symptom diary cards were collected hourly Saturday from 8:00 AM to 10:00 AM (baseline period). Subjects who had sufficient symptoms were randomized into five groups and received medication at 10:00 AM and 10:00 PM on Saturday and at 10:00 AM on Sunday: azelastine 0.1% (1 spray [0.12 mg] per nostril every 12 hours, 2 sprays per nostril every every 12 hours, or 2 sprays per nostril once daily), Chlor-Trimeton Repetabs (12 mg twice daily), or placebo (twice daily). Diary cards were completed hourly (11:00 AM to 4:00 PM) and at 6:00, 8:00, and 10:00 PM on Saturday and again hourly on Sunday (from 8:00 AM to 4:00 PM) to evaluate rhinitis symptoms and adverse events.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-nine subjects completed the study. The groups that received 2 sprays of azelastine per nostril once and twice daily and the chlorpheniramine group had statistically significantly more improvement in total rhinitis symptoms than the placebo group without serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports a once to twice daily dosing regimen for 2 sprays of 0.1% azelastine in the acute treatment of allergic rhinitis with onset of action within 2 to 3 hours.

Prevalence, economic, and medical impact of tobacco smoking

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this review is to report the epidemiology and risks associated with tobacco smoking. It also suggests reasons and measures to achieve a smoke-free society.

DATA SOURCES

References are limited to the English language and human subjects. All are publications from either the United States or the United Kingdom and extend back to the past 50 years. Sources include computerized databases and bibliographies of recent articles and books.

STUDY SELECTION

Papers were selected on the basis of their timeliness, credibility of their data, explanation of important findings, extrapolation of clinical data from large patient populations, and clarification of controversial issues. Approximately 60% of the articles initially reviewed are included in the bibliography.

RESULTS

Tobacco smoking continues to affect the lives of millions of Americans. The risks of cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and respiratory diseases are significantly increased in both the smoker and in those exposed to environmental tobacco smoke.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the consequences of tobacco smoking is necessary to effectively mobilize the appropriate political, social, and medical resources to combat this most important health issue.

Nasal cytology in patients with allergic rhinitis: effects of intranasal fluticasone propionate

BACKGROUND

Nasal cytograms of patients with allergic rhinitis contain increased numbers of eosinophils and basophilic cells. Neutrophils are also more numerous in cytograms of allergic persons. Topical intranasal corticosteroid therapy for allergic rhinitis has been shown to decrease the numbers of some inflammatory cell types. Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray, a potent synthetic corticosteroid preparation, is effective therapy for seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

Nasal mucosal scrapings were obtained with a Rhinoprobe (Apotex Scientific, Inc. Arlington, Texas) before and after therapy with fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray at several doses in patients with either seasonal allergic rhinitis (2 to 4 weeks' therapy) or perennial allergic rhinitis (24 weeks' therapy). More than 1000 paired nasal cytograms obtained from patients participating in five multicenter studies were evaluated.

RESULTS

The percentage of patients with nasal eosinophils (p < 0.01, most studies) and basophilic cells (p < 0.05, most studies) decreased significantly after treatment with fluticasone propionate compared with placebo-treated patients. Similar findings were observed with beclomethasone dipropionate in one study. The number of neutrophils remained relatively unchanged after treatment with the intranasal corticosteroids or placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the therapeutic benefits of topical intranasal fluticasone propionate and beclomethasone dipropionate for the therapy of seasonal and perennial allergic rhinitis are reflected by the decrease in inflammatory cells in the nasal mucosa.

Reduction of environmental tobacco smoke exposure among asthmatic children: a controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This randomized clinical trial tested a behavioral medicine program designed to reduce asthmatic children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) in the home.

DESIGN

Families were randomly assigned to an experimental preventive medicine counseling group, a monitoring control group, or a usual treatment control group. Families were measured six times over 1 year.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety-one families were recruited from four allergy clinics.

INTERVENTION

The experimental group received a 6-month series of counseling sessions designed to decrease ETS exposure. This group also monitored smoking, exposure, and children's asthma symptoms. The monitoring group did not receive counseling and the usual treatment control group received outcome measures only.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Parents reported the daily number of cigarettes children were exposed to during the week preceding interviews. A nicotine air monitor and construct validity analysis confirmed the validity of exposure reports. Exposure to the parent's cigarettes in the home decreased for all groups. The experimental group attained a 79 percent decrease in children's ETS exposure, compared with 42 percent for the monitoring control and 34 percent for the usual treatment control group. Repeated-measures analysis of variance resulted in a significant (F([10,350] = 1.92, p < 0.05) group by time effect. At the final 12-month visit, the experimental/counseling group sustained a 51% decrease in children's exposure to cigarettes in the home from all smokers, while the monitoring control group showed an 18% decrease and the usual treatment control group a 15% decrease from pre-intervention [corrected].

CONCLUSION

A behavioral medicine program was successful in reducing exposure to ETS in the home for these asthmatic children.

Double-blind assessment of azelastine in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis

Azelastine is a chemically novel multifunctional antiallergy investigational drug capable of inhibiting mast-cell activation and the synthesis and/or release of chemical mediators of the upper and lower airway inflammatory response. In previous controlled clinical trials, azelastine was shown to be effective in treating the symptoms of both seasonal allergic rhinitis and perennial allergic rhinitis. The objective of this 8-week double-blind trial was to evaluate further azelastine's efficacy and safety in improving the symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis over a prolonged period of treatment. One hundred ninety-nine patients with symptomatic perennial allergic rhinitis were randomized to receive in a double-blind fashion azelastine, 2 mg bid, clemastine fumarate, 1.34 mg bid, or placebo bid for 8 weeks. Patients treated with azelastine had superior mean percent improvements in the total symptom complex score (nose blows, sneezes, stuffy nose, runny nose, itchy nose, and itchy eyes/ears/throat) versus placebo at each evaluation point and overall across all 8 weeks (P < .01) of the trial. Improvements in the individual symptoms of rhinitis were statistically significant (P < or = .04) for nose blows, sneezes, runny nose, itchy nose, and itchy eyes, ears, and throat. Treatment with azelastine also resulted in a clinically meaningful improvement in nasal congestion. Improvement in congestion was accompanied by a decreased requirement for backup decongestant medication. The adverse experiences were generally mild and well tolerated. Azelastine provided effective prolonged relief of the symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis with no adverse effects that would limit its long-term use.

Azelastine nasal spray in the management of seasonal allergic rhinitis

Azelastine is a novel, investigational, antiallergy medication that inhibits the generation, release, and/or end-organ activity of multiple mediators of the inflammatory process in vitro and in vivo. Azelastine is capable of inhibiting both early-phase and late-phase allergic responses in animals and humans. In this 2-day trial in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis, we evaluated the onset of action, duration of effect, and safety and efficacy of azelastine nasal solution (Astelin N.S.) in an outdoor, highly allergenic environment. Two hundred ninety-four patients who satisfied entry criteria were randomized to azelastine 2 sprays/nostril q24h or q12h, oral chlorpheniramine maleate 12 mg q12h, or placebo in this multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group study. Rhinitis symptoms were analyzed individually and combined as total and major symptom complexes. For both azelastine treatment groups, the overall mean percent improvements in the total and major symptom complex severity scores were statistically significant (P < or = .05) versus placebo. Improvements in rhinitis symptoms were observed by the second hour after administration of azelastine and lasted up to 24 hours. The therapeutic effect of azelastine was apparent for all rhinitis symptoms, not just one or a few symptoms. Seventy-three percent of the patients treated with azelastine reported overall improvement upon global assessment of their symptoms. Adverse effects with azelastine were generally mild or moderate. Azelastine nasal spray, administered either once or twice daily, was effective in treating the symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis and demonstrated a rapid onset of action with a duration of response lasting 12 to 24 hours.

Fluticasone propionate: an effective alternative treatment for seasonal allergic rhinitis in adults and adolescents

BACKGROUND

Topical corticosteroids are widely regarded as the reference standard in allergic rhinitis therapy because they are well tolerated and effective against all rhinitis symptoms. We evaluated the efficacy, onset of action, and safety of two dosing regimens of the new corticosteroid fluticasone propionate compared with that of beclomethasone dipropionate in patients with moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomized multicenter trial, 110 adolescents and 128 adults were treated for 4 weeks with one of the following regimens: fluticasone aqueous nasal spray 100 micrograms twice daily or 200 micrograms once daily, beclomethasone aqueous nasal spray 168 micrograms twice daily, or placebo.

RESULTS

Patient-rated scores for nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, and combined nasal symptoms indicated that the two fluticasone regimens were equally effective and that both were superior to beclomethasone during most of the study (P < or = .05) and to placebo throughout the study (P < or = .01). Both fluticasone regimens also demonstrated significant clinical efficacy by 24 hours after the first dose. Clinician-rated mean total nasal symptoms scores for all three active treatments were superior to placebo at most time points but were not significantly different from each other. All treatments were well tolerated, with similar incidence and type of adverse events in all treatment groups and no apparent effects on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis function.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluticasone aqueous nasal spray was effective in relieving nasal symptoms in adolescents and adults with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Fluticasone administered once or twice daily was superior to beclomethasone administered twice daily in relieving nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea and in reducing nasal symptoms more quickly.

Intranasal flunisolide spray as an adjunct to oral antibiotic therapy for sinusitis

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of sinusitis is difficult and there are few controlled studies of customary therapies. In particular, the possible role of topical intranasal steroid as an adjunct to antibiotic treatment has not been evaluated.

METHODS

The study was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel trial in which patients aged 14 years or older were recruited from allergy practices. All patients had maxillary sinusitis documented by radiographs. Treatment consisted of amoxicillin/clavulanate potassium 500 mg combined with nasal spray of either 100 micrograms flunisolide or placebo to each nostril three times a day for 3 weeks (phase I) followed by administration of flunisolide or placebo nasal spray alone three times a day for 4 weeks (phase II).

RESULTS

Clinical symptoms and signs decreased significantly in both treatment groups during phase I (p < 0.01). There was a trend to greater improvement in the patients treated with flunisolide, but only the decrease in turbinate swelling/obstruction was statistically significant at the end of phase I when compared with placebo (p = 0.041). Patients' global assessment of overall effectiveness of treatment was higher for flunisolide than placebo after phase I (p = 0.007) and after phase II (p = 0.08). Maxillary sinus radiographs showed improvement in both treatment groups during phase I (p < 0.004) with somewhat greater regression of abnormal findings in patients treated with flunisolide after phase II (p = 0.066). However, 80% of radiographs were still abnormal at the end of phase I. All types of inflammatory cells were significantly decreased in nasal cytograms in patients treated with flunisolide in comparison with those treated with placebo. Flare-up of sinusitis during phase II occurred in 26% of with those treated with placebo. Flare-up of sinusitis during phase II occurred in 26% of patients treated with flunisolide and 35% of those treated with placebo and tended to be more severe in the latter, although these differences were not statistically significant. Adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal symptoms and headache, were similar in both groups and more frequent in phase I than in phase II, (42 vs 15 patients); these side effects were probably due to the antibiotic.

CONCLUSION

The addition of flunisolide topical nasal spray as an adjunct to antibiotic therapy was most effective in global evaluations, tended to improve symptoms, to decrease inflammatory cells in nasal cytograms, to normalize ultrasound scans, and to aid regression of radiographic abnormalities compared with placebo spray.

Once daily fluticasone propionate is as effective for perennial allergic rhinitis as twice daily beclomethasone diproprionate

BACKGROUND

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray, a new potent corticosteroid, is effective when given once or twice daily for seasonal allergic rhinitis.

METHODS

Fluticasone propionate was compared with beclomethasone dipropionate in a multicenter double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in 466 patients with perennial allergic rhinitis. Adults and adolescents (aged 12 to 71 years) with moderate to severe symptoms, nasal eosinophilia, and a positive skin test reaction (> or = 2+) to a perennial allergen received fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray 100 micrograms twice daily or 200 micrograms once daily, or beclomethasone dipropionate aqueous nasal spray 168 micrograms twice daily, or placebo for 6 months.

RESULTS

Clinician- and patient-rated scores for nasal obstruction (including obstruction on awakening), rhinorrhea, sneezing, and nasal itching were reduced by the first visit at 7 days after initiation of active treatment and remained lower than those of patients receiving placebo throughout the 6-month treatment period. Nasal eosinophilia was reduced in significantly more patients receiving active treatment. The incidence of adverse events was similar in all four treatment groups except for blood in nasal mucus, which was reported by significantly more patients in the two twice-daily active treatment groups compared with the placebo group. There was no evidence of systemic effects of fluticasone propionate. There were no significant differences between fluticasone propionate given once or twice daily or beclomethasone dipropionate given twice daily for any efficacy or safety evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray given once daily in the morning is safe and effective therapy for perennial allergic rhinitis and is as effective as twice daily dosing with fluticasone propionate or beclomethasone dipropionate.

Reduction of secondary smoke exposure in asthmatic children: parent counseling

Epidemiological evidence shows that children's exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke increases their risk of respiratory illness. This study evaluated five families and their asthmatic children (aged 5-14 years) in an outpatient counseling program for reducing the children's exposure to passive smoking. Intervention included biweekly counseling/instructions for parents to limit their children's tobacco exposure. A multiple-baseline, quasiexperimental design was used for self-reported measures of the children's smoke exposure and the parent's smoking frequency. Counseling was associated with smoke exposure reduction of 40-80% from baseline for each of 5 children, with most improvements sustained during follow-up. This study provides support for the development of tobacco exposure prevention programs for children with pulmonary disease.

Intranasal anticholinergic therapy of rhinorrhea

This article reviews the role of anticholinergic therapy for the rhinorrhea that occurs in various rhinopathies, including irritant reactions, perennial nonallergic rhinitis, viral infection rhinitis, allergic rhinitis, and temperature-induced rhinitis. The use of a topical anticholinergic medication, ipratropium bromide, and its ability to inhibit methacholine and rhinitis-induced hypersecretion is emphasized. Ipratropium bromide appears to be both safe and effective in reducing this troublesome symptom.

Diagnosis and "desensitization" in tetanus vaccine hypersensitivity

A 5-year-old boy was evaluated for a history of an anaphylactic reaction to a DPT immunization at 18 months of age. Cutaneous tests and RAST disclosed high titers of IgE antibody to tetanus toxoid vaccine. Variable sensitivity to different vaccine commercial preparations was demonstrated. Immunization was achieved using a 9-step graded dosing schedule with the tetanus toxoid vaccine to which the patient was least sensitive.

Ipratropium bromide aqueous nasal spray for patients with perennial allergic rhinitis: a study of its effect on their symptoms, quality of life, and nasal cytology

Ipratropium bromide is an anticholinergic agent with topical activity that has been studied as a freon-propelled aerosol spray for therapy of nonallergic rhinitis. This is the first report of its use both as an aqueous nasal spray and in perennial allergic rhinitis. In this study 123 patients who had symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis were randomized to receive ipratropium bromide 21 micrograms or 42 micrograms or placebo, one spray per nostril three times a day for 4 weeks. Patients maintained daily diaries of duration and severity of nasal symptoms and were evaluated weekly. Mean duration and severity of rhinorrhea was decreased in both ipratropium bromide treatment groups by comparison with placebo, with consistently greatest improvement in the group treated with ipratropium bromide 42 micrograms per nostril three times a day. No statistically significant differences occurred among treatment groups in duration or severity of postnasal drip, congestion, or sneezing. Seventy percent of patients treated with 42 micrograms of ipratropium bromide thought it had good or excellent effect on rhinorrhea (p less than 0.05 vs placebo); significantly more patients thought that it had improved the quality of life (p = 0.02). No changes occurred in nasal cytology, and no significant local or systemic adverse events occurred. These data indicate that ipratropium bromide significantly decreases the rhinorrhea of perennial allergic rhinitis.

Long-term comparison of three combinations of albuterol, theophylline, and beclomethasone in children with chronic asthma

Three combination regimens, (1) inhaled albuterol (ALB) with oral theophylline (THEO), (2) inhaled ALB with inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), or (3) inhaled ALB, inhaled BDP, and oral THEO, were evaluated and compared as optimal pharmacotherapy for chronic asthma in 111 children. In this double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study, children, aged 6 to 16 years with moderately severe asthma (unstable despite daily medications), were treated with one of the combinations for 12 weeks. Patients were evaluated every 4 weeks by spirometry and serum THEO measurement. Patients kept daily symptom diaries, measured peak flow rates twice daily, and recorded adverse events. Treatment groups did not differ in disease or demographic characteristics at study entry. All three combination treatments provided and maintained significant improvement in FVC, FEV1, and FEF25%-75% volume points, and compared with that of pretreatment, with no significant differences between treatments. Throughout the 12-week treatment period, however, patients receiving BDP had lower symptom scores, fewer had more than one asthma attack, fewer required "bursts" of prednisone (p = 0.001), and fewer required rescue medication (p = 0.009). Significantly more patients receiving BDP said that they felt better than they did at the beginning of the study compared with the number of patients not receiving BDP (p = 0.002). Adverse events were similar among treatment groups.

Comparative safety of H1 antihistamines

In the allergic reaction, mast cells degranulate, releasing inflammatory mediators including histamine. The H1 receptor antihistamines have been developed over the past 50 years to minimize the clinical symptoms caused by this reaction. Currently, H1 antihistamines are taken by approximately 30 million Americans per year. First-generation H1 antihistamines, some of which are available without prescription, can cross the blood-brain barrier and have been reported to produce sedation in 10% to 25% of users. When activities that require mental alertness and concentration are considered--school performance and driving, for example--this effect is troublesome and even potentially hazardous. The newer, second-generation H1 antihistamines (eg, astemizole, cetirizine, loratadine, terfenadine) have difficulty entering the brain because they are typically large, lipophobic molecules that have charged side chains and are extensively bound to protein. Consequently, they appear to induce sedation less commonly than classic antihistamines. Since a primary tenet of medical care has always been primum non nocere--first of all, in the management of clinical illness, do no harm--it is important in these "State-of-the-Art Perspectives" to address the comparative safety of the H1 antihistamines. A number of methodologies have been used to make this assessment, including the multiple sleep latency test, the P300 (P3) wave of the auditory-evoked potential, self-ratings, visual function tests, and tests that measure reaction times, visual-motor coordination, and driving skills. The effect of the interaction of H1 antihistamines with alcohol and tranquilizers also has been examined.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Intranasal fluocortin butyl in patients with perennial rhinitis: a 12-month efficacy and safety study including nasal biopsy

Fluocortin butyl (FCB) is a recently developed topical intranasal corticosteroid that is inhaled as a powder and has been demonstrated to be well tolerated and to improve symptoms and signs of perennial rhinitis in previous short-term studies. This multicenter, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of FCB during a 12-month treatment period in patients with perennial rhinitis. Treatment was initiated with one inhalation of FCB in each nostril three times a day (total dosage, 3 mg/day). In subsequent months, one third of the patients was maintained at the dosage of 3 mg/day, one third at a lower dosage of 2 mg/day, and the remaining one third of the patients at a larger dosage of 4 to 8 mg/day. Of 109 patients enrolled in the study, 90 patients (82.6%) completed all 12 months of treatment. Symptom and sign scores decreased significantly (p less than 0.001) at the 2-month evaluation compared to scores at baseline, and the improvement was maintained throughout the 12-month study period. After 12 months, greater than 80% of the patients had substantial control of symptoms. Specimens of nasal biopsies, performed at the beginning and end of treatment, revealed a decrease in eosinophils and other cellular infiltrates, a slight tendency of an increase in mast cell counts, and a trend toward normalization of the nasal mucosa. There were few adverse effects. Mean plasma cortisol levels were normal before and after corticotropin stimulation at baseline and after 12 months of FCB therapy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Comparison of intranasal cromolyn sodium, 4%, and oral terfenadine for allergic rhinitis: symptoms, nasal cytology, nasal ciliary clearance, and rhinomanometry

Topical intranasal cromolyn sodium, 4% solution, and oral terfenadine, 60 mg tablets, both relieve symptoms of allergic rhinitis with few or no adverse effects, but no comparison of their relative efficacy has been reported. In this double-blind, double-dummy study, 79 patients, ages 12-56 years with symptoms of allergic rhinitis, were randomized to receive either active cromolyn sodium, 1 spray in each nostril QID, or active terfenadine BID along with the appropriate placebo spray or tablet for 4 weeks following a 1-week baseline qualification period. Patients' daily symptom scores were reviewed weekly and constituted the primary efficacy measures. Changes in nasal cytology, nasal ciliary clearance, and rhinomanometry were also assessed. The presence of adverse effects and the overall score of medication efficacy at the end of each week was recorded. The cromolyn sodium and terfenadine groups had comparable baseline scores for severity of allergic rhinitis symptoms and both treatments resulted in significant improvement (P less than .0001) with no statistical difference between them for total symptom scores at the end of 4 weeks. Eosinophils in nasal samples were decreased significantly in the cromolyn treated group with no significant change in the terfenadine-treated group. There were no significant differences between treatment groups in ciliary clearance or rhinomanometry. Adverse effects were uncommon and mild. We conclude that cromolyn sodium and terfenadine are comparably effective and well-accepted treatments for allergic rhinitis.

Vocal cord dysfunction in a child with asthma

Vocal cord dysfunction is uncommon in children. We present the case of a 12-year-old boy with a history of mild, intermittent asthma from 7 to 10 years of age. Subsequently, severe, rapid-onset attacks of respiratory distress occurred with increasing frequency. After a life-threatening attack of airway obstruction with 3 minutes of apnea, he was hospitalized for diagnostic studies. Although pulmonary function tests were normal, laryngoscopy under general anesthesia revealed extremely severe vocal cord spasm induced by minimal contact of the laryngoscope. It required intravenous lidocaine and muscle relaxant to reverse. Spasm was not demonstrable one week later on repeat laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy. No structural abnormalities were seen. There was considerable family stress exacerbated by anxiety about the patient's illness. Parents were told that the condition was different from asthma and probably functional in origin. There have been no further episodes, possibly due to counseling and education in relaxation techniques as well as oral pharmacotherapy for asthma with avoidance of inhaled medications.

Performance effects of antihistamines

In 1988 an estimated 30 million Americans spent more than $500 million for single-entity antihistamines. Classic first-generation antihistamines, which are available without prescription, can cross the blood-brain barrier and have been reported to produce various central nervous system effects. Sedation, the most common adverse effect of these agents, occurs in 10% to 25% of antihistamine users. Drowsiness has been attributed to the blockade of central histaminergic receptors; antagonism of other brain receptors, such as serotonergic, cholinergic, and central alpha-adrenergic receptors, has also been proposed. The newer second-generation H1-receptor antagonists are typically large, lipophobic molecules with a charged side chain and are extensively bound to albumin. Consequently, these agents have difficulty entering the brain, and they appear no more likely to induce sedation than does placebo. The effects of antihistamines on psychomotor reflexes and driving, antihistamine-induced drowsiness, and interaction of antihistamines with alcohol and tranquilizers have been studied with numerous methodologies. The centrally acting first-generation agents commonly cause greater performance decrements as compared with the newer, nonsedating, second-generation antihistamines.

A dose-ranging study of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray for seasonal allergic rhinitis assessed by symptoms, rhinomanometry, and nasal cytology

Fluticasone propionate is a new glucocorticosteroid with potent topical activity. In a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study, 423 adult patients with moderate to severe seasonal allergic rhinitis received placebo or fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray at doses of 25, 100, or 400 micrograms twice daily (b.i.d.) for 2 weeks. Efficacy was evaluated by nasal symptom scores, nasal airflow, nasal cytology, and global evaluation. All doses of fluticasone propionate were significantly better than placebo in reducing symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. Patients receiving the largest dose of fluticasone propionate (400 micrograms b.i.d.) had a slightly greater reduction (not significant) in symptom scores than patients receiving the smallest dose (25 micrograms b.i.d.). Symptom improvement was evident within 3 days of treatment. Nasal airflow improved in the groups treated with fluticasone propionate, 100 and 400 micrograms b.i.d. Examination of nasal cytograms revealed a striking decrease in both eosinophils and basophils in all three groups receiving active treatment compared with placebo. There were few adverse events and no treatment-related abnormalities in laboratory assays or evaluations of hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenocortical axis function. Comparison of treatment groups indicated that fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray was as safe as placebo at the doses studied.

Evaluation of symptom relief, nasal airflow, nasal cytology, and acceptability of two formulations of flunisolide nasal spray in patients with perennial allergic rhinitis

A new formulation of intranasal flunisolide containing less propylene glycol was compared with the original formulation for efficacy and acceptability in more than 200 patients with symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis. In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group study, symptomatic patients were treated with either the new or the original formulation of 0.025% solution of intranasal flunisolide for 4 weeks to provide 200 micrograms flunisolide daily. Both formulations were highly effective in decreasing symptom scores as evident from patient diary reports before and after treatment (P less than .001). Similarly, nasal airflow was improved with each treatment as measured by anterior rhinomanometry (P less than .0002) and the number of patients with nasal eosinophilia decreased (P less than .01). Finally, fewer patients using the new formulation reported nasal burning or stinging and the acceptability rating of the new formulation was higher.

Antihistamine- and decongestant-induced performance decrements

Among the most common of health problems, allergies afflict more than one of every six Americans. In the allergic reaction, mast cells degranulate, releasing inflammatory mediators such as histamine. These mediators in turn cause smooth muscle contraction, itch, mucus secretion, and vascular leakage. A number of pharmacologic agents, including the H1 receptor antihistamines and the sympathomimetic decongestants, have been developed in an attempt to minimize such effects. Antihistamines were first used clinically 50 years ago. Currently taken by approximately 30 million Americans each year, they are grouped by structure into six classes. Until recently, all of the classes, or first-generation antihistamines, were thought to be relatively equal in efficacy and, because of their ability to cross the blood-brain barrier, they all caused varying degrees of sedation. The effects of antihistamines on psychomotor reflexes and driving skills, antihistamine-induced drowsiness, and the interaction of antihistamines with alcohol and tranquilizers are reviewed. The centrally acting first-generation agents, and the performance decrements these agents commonly induce, are compared with the newer, nonsedating, second-generation antihistamines (eg, terfenadine, astemizole, cetirizine, and loratadine). Although decongestants do not appear to cause impaired performance, this needs to be evaluated further, particularly with regard to decongestant-induced insomnia.

A simplified screening test for the diagnosis of allergy

The Quidel allergy screen is a relatively rapid (less than 2 hours) multiallergen dipstick method for detecting specific immunoglobin E antibodies in serum. It was developed to answer the need of primary physician nonspecialists in allergy for a convenient in-office screening test for diagnosing allergy. The new test was evaluated against the benchmark diagnostic skin tests and the radioallergosorbent serologic tests for sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and technical feasibility in an office setting. It was found that while the Quidel allergy screen lacks the specificity of the standard tests, its overall sensitivity, as defined by the percentage of patients with positive skin reactions who also tested positive with the Quidel screen (68%), its ease of use, and its rapidity warrant its consideration as a screening tool for confirming a possible case of allergy.

Beta 2 adrenergic agonists--oral or aerosol for the treatment of asthma?

Beta 2 adrenergic agonists, especially in aerosol formulations, are often used as first-line medications for treating the symptoms of bronchial asthma. Although oral forms of these medications may result in greater improvement in small airway function, comparative studies of these two routes of administration show that inhaled beta 2 adrenergic bronchodilators have a more rapid onset of activity, are as long lasting, and as effective in improving pulmonary function as their oral forms. Moreover, they are equally effective at much lower dosages which results in fewer adverse effects. Their use in metered-dose inhalers, nebulizers, and breath-activated devices, is improving asthma therapy.

Evaluating rhinitis: clinical, rhinomanometric, and cytologic assessments

Allergic rhinitis is a common disease. Its diagnostic accuracy can be improved by quantifiable methods, such as scoring symptoms and signs, rhinomanometry, and the examination of nasal cytologic specimens. These methods are fast, easy to use, and well tolerated by patients. The same methods can also be used to follow changes as they occur with treatment. For example, improvements can be documented in patients with allergic rhinitis receiving topical corticosteroids, including flunisolide. Flunisolide therapy decreases the symptoms, improves the patency of the nasal airways, and leads to more normal nasal cytologic studies in patients with allergic rhinitis.

The use of antihistamines for the treatment of airway disease

This report reviews studies of the use of antihistamines for the treatment of allergic respiratory diseases. The cumulative results indicate that the nonsedative antihistamine terfenadine, given orally at a dosage of 60 mg twice daily, is effective in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in both adults and children. No major side effects have been reported, and sensitivity to this agent is not decreased after eight weeks of treatment. Preliminary data on the use of antihistamines for the treatment of asthma are also reviewed.

Efficacy of azelastine in perennial allergic rhinitis: clinical and rhinomanometric evaluation

Azelastine is a chemically novel medication that has been demonstrated to be clinically effective for asthma and seasonal allergic rhinitis. In a 10-week, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study, the efficacy and safety of azelastine, 1 mg and 2 mg twice daily, were evaluated in 192 patients with symptoms of perennial allergic rhinitis. Patients maintained daily symptom and adverse-experience diaries and were evaluated every 2 weeks by the investigators. Pseudoephedrine, 30 mg, was provided as backup medication. Amelioration of most individual symptoms and a decrease in the total symptom scores were observed with both dosages of azelastine; greater improvement with 2 mg twice daily than with 1 mg twice daily, was observed. Nasal congestion, as a symptom and as reflected by rhinomanometric assessment, was the least improved parameter. Backup decongestant medication decreased during treatment with azelastine and increased during the placebo regimen. There were no major adverse effects.

Comparison of a new sustained-release theophylline preparation, TheoBeads, with Theo-Dur tablets in children with asthma

A new, slow-release theophylline formulation for children, TheoBeads, which has the potential for once-daily dosing, has become available. We report the results of a study of pediatric patients whose medication was changed from Theo-Dur tablets b.i.d. to TheoBeads q.d. Forty-nine children with asthma (aged 6-12 years) were treated with b.i.d. Theo-Dur to produce therapeutic maximum and minimum concentration levels (i.e., 8-20 micrograms/ml). Approximately half the patients were then transferred to TheoBeads given q.d. at the same total daily dose and retitrated; seven patients needed to be changed to b.i.d. dosing due to unacceptable fluctuations. The other half of the patients continued on b.i.d. Theo-Dur. Following at least 5 days of steady-state dosing, serum theophylline levels were assayed over a 24-hour period. It was found that: 1. Children changed to q.d. TheoBeads showed no change in their overall asthma control based on clinical diary entries and peak flow measurements. 2. Lower Cmax and Cmin theophylline levels and a smaller area under the curve were noted for patients taking q.d. TheoBeads compared to those taking b.i.d. Theo-Dur. 3. Administration of TheoBeads q.d. resulted in a significantly larger overall peak-to-trough fluctuation and a higher percentage of patients with subtherapeutic theophylline levels in the second 12-hour period than did b.i.d. Theo-Dur administration. In summary, when children receiving b.i.d. Theo-Dur were transferred to q.d. TheoBeads, they did not maintain even and sustained therapeutic theophylline levels, although asthma control was not adversely affected during the short period of observation.