Randomised, placebo controlled trial of effect of a leukotriene receptor antagonist, montelukast, on tapering inhaled corticosteroids in asthmatic patients

Cost effectiveness of leukotriene modifiers in adults with asthma

Asthma is the most common chronic disorder in industrialised nations, with over 100 million people worldwide affected. Leukotrienes are chemical mediators released from mast cells, eosinophils and basophils. They cause bronchoconstriction, an increase in mucous secretions and activation of inflammatory cells. Leukotriene modifiers are a long-term controller medication used to treat asthma. They function by selectively competing for the leukotriene receptor sites, thereby blocking their action, or by inhibiting 5-lipoxygenase and thus preventing leukotriene formation. Both current US and Global Initiative for Asthma treatment guidelines have clarified the role of leukotriene modifiers in the management of asthma in adults and children. Leukotriene modifiers have two distinct roles: to replace inhaled corticosteroids in milder asthma and as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in more severe asthma. While efficacy is certainly an important issue, economic considerations are also important in a disease such as asthma where there are a variety of treatment options and the severity of the disease varies widely. This review examined published studies to better understand the cost effectiveness of leukotriene modifiers in adults with asthma. Fifteen articles were found that analysed the cost effectiveness of leukotriene modifiers, with almost all performed in the US. The vast majority of the studies were retrospective claims analyses, but three randomised controlled trials incorporating economic outcomes have been reported. The majority of the articles found that for both monotherapy in mild persistent asthma and add-on therapy in moderate persistent asthma, leukotriene modifiers were less cost effective than inhaled corticosteroids with or without a long-acting beta2-adrenoceptor agonist. However, these results must be viewed cautiously as in several studies there were methodological issues such as comparisons of unequal treatment groups or inappropriate use of leukotriene modifiers in stepwise treatment.

As-needed inhaled beta2-adrenoceptor agonists in moderate-to-severe asthma: current recommendations

Intermediate-acting inhaled beta2-agonists (e.g. albuterol [salbutamol]), once recommended for round-the-clock bronchodilation, are now recommended to be used exclusively as-needed. Guidelines advise that asthma should be controlled with anti-inflammatory therapeutic strategies so that the as-needed requirement for inhaled beta2-agonists should be infrequent; ideally less than several times per week, up to once a day for exercise, and none at night. These recommendations are based upon the recognition that asthma is primarily an inflammatory condition and that the major thrust of therapy should be anti-inflammatory, including environmental control and administration of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), leukotriene-receptor antagonists, and possibly oral theophylline and inhaled cromones; the cromones include cromolyn sodium (sodium cromogylcate) and nedocromil. While this is the primary rationale behind the as-needed infrequent prescription of the inhaled beta2-agonist paradigm, there are a number of detrimental effects that can be seen with regularly scheduled (or frequent as-needed) use of inhaled beta2-agonists. These include tolerance to the bronchodilator and particularly the bronchoprotective effects, increased airway responsiveness to allergen, worsened asthma control, and, probably most importantly, over-reliance on an excellent symptom reliever leading to undertreatment. Any or all of these could be responsible for the demonstrated dose-response relationship between inhaled beta2-agonist overuse and death from asthma. Several controlled clinical trials, which have included many patients with at least moderately severe asthma, have failed to demonstrate any obvious advantage to the regular scheduled use of inhaled beta2-agonists compared with as-needed inhaled beta2-agonists. On the other hand, despite no obvious advantage, regular use of albuterol 1000-1200 microg/day appears to be well tolerated and reasonably safe. When asthma is treated using an as-needed, infrequent inhaled beta2-agonist, the requirements for beta2-agonists become a useful marker of whether or not the asthma is adequately controlled. When inhaled beta2-agonists are required inordinately frequently (i.e. when asthma is not adequately controlled), after ensuring compliance with ICS, the most common strategy is to add one of the long-acting inhaled beta2-agonists twice daily. On the basis of the available evidence, the as-needed intermediate-acting inhaled beta2-agonist therapeutic strategy appears appropriate for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.

Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus fluticasone propionate plus montelukast: a cost-effective comparison for asthma

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Asthma, owing to its chronic nature, is associated with a substantial economic burden. Healthcare providers need to compare the cost effectiveness of alternative asthma treatment options to ensure that they obtain the best value for money from the resources they control. The objective of the current study was to compare the cost effectiveness of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate in combination with fluticasone propionate plus montelukast in patients with symptomatic asthma uncontrolled with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) monotherapy.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Direct healthcare resource data were prospectively collected during a double-blind, randomized, 12-week clinical study of inhaled salmeterol/fluticasone propionate 50/100 microg twice daily (n = 356) and inhaled fluticasone propionate 100 microg twice daily plus oral montelukast 10mg daily (n = 369). Resources were costed in Dutch guilders (NLG) from the perspective of The Netherlands healthcare system using 1999/2000 prices, but have been presented in US dollars and euros. The primary effectiveness measure was the proportion of successfully treated weeks (based on mean morning PEF values). Secondary measures were episode-free days, symptom-free days, and symptom-free nights.

RESULTS

Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was more effective than fluticasone propionate plus montelukast as measured by the proportion of successfully treated weeks mean 63.3% vs 39.0%; median difference 25%; p < 0.001). Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was also more effective than fluticasone propionate plus montelukast according to the secondary effectiveness measures. The mean total direct daily healthcare costs per patient were 16% higher with fluticasone propionate plus montelukast than with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate mainly due to higher drug costs in the former group (2.25 US dollars vs 1.94; 1.92 euro vs 1.66, respectively; the NLG was fixed against the euro at a rate of 1 euro = NLG2.2 on 31 December 1998; 1 US dollars = NLG1.883, June 2003; 1 US dollars= 0.848 euro, June 2003). Incremental cost-effectiveness analyses showed that salmeterol/fluticasone propionate was dominant over fluticasone propionate plus montelukast and sensitivity analyses showed these results to be robust.

CONCLUSION

Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is a more cost-effective treatment option than fluticasone propionate plus montelukast for patients with symptomatic asthma uncontrolled by ICS.

The challenge of mild persistent asthma

OBJECTIVE

To review the current data and treatment options for mild persistent asthma.

DATA SOURCES

A MEDLINE search was performed for relevant articles.

STUDY SELECTION

The expert opinion of the author was used to select studies for inclusion in this review.

RESULTS

Current data suggest that asthma severity is determined early in life and that disease progression may not occur outside early childhood. Furthermore, no therapy has been demonstrated to clearly prevent or reverse structural airway changes in patients with persistent asthma. Thus, the primary goal of asthma therapy is to prevent disease exacerbations rather than to halt disease progress, at least in patients past early childhood. Published reports of severe exacerbations in patients with reported mild asthma may actually reflect inclusion of patients with more severe forms of the disease who were inappropriately classified in terms of asthma severity.

CONCLUSION

Unlike the case for moderate and severe asthma, where regular therapy with inhaled corticosteroids is clearly the treatment of choice, clear guidelines for treating patients with mild persistent asthma have not been established. Patients with mild disease without severe exacerbations may require only the minimum therapy necessary for disease control.

National Athletic Trainers' Association position statement: management of asthma in athletes

OBJECTIVE

To present guidelines for the recognition, prophylaxis, and management of asthma that lead to improvement in the quality of care certified athletic trainers and other heath care providers can offer to athletes with asthma, especially exercise-induced asthma.

BACKGROUND

Many athletes have difficulty breathing during or after athletic events and practices. Although a wide variety of conditions can predispose an athlete to breathing difficulties, the most common cause is undiagnosed or uncontrolled asthma. At least 15% to 25% of athletes may have signs and symptoms suggestive of asthma, including exercise-induced asthma. Athletic trainers are in a unique position to recognize breathing difficulties caused by undiagnosed or uncontrolled asthma, particularly when asthma follows exercise. Once the diagnosis of asthma is made, the athletic trainer should play a pivotal role in supervising therapies to prevent and control asthma symptoms. It is also important for the athletic trainer to recognize when asthma is not the underlying cause for respiratory difficulties, so that the athlete can be evaluated and treated properly.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendations contained in this position statement describe a structured approach for the diagnosis and management of asthma in an exercising population. Athletic trainers should be educated to recognize asthma symptoms in order to identify patients who might benefit from better management and should understand the management of asthma, especially exercise-induced asthma, to participate as active members of the asthma care team.

Asthma treatment in the 21st century: what's next?

Asthma treatment is evolving as we enter the 21st century. This review focuses on several different areas of asthma treatment now in evolution. These include: (1) the proper role of various asthma controllers--either already approved or under investigation--besides inhaled corticosteriods in asthma therapy; (2) the potential role for immune and cytokine modulation for asthma therapy; (3) the potential role for pharmacogenetics in asthma therapy; and (4) whether single-inhaler therapy with a combination of an inhaled corticosteriod and a long-acted beta-agonist could be used for both maintenance and rescue in patients with asthma.

The linkage between Churg-Strauss syndrome and leukotriene receptor antagonists: fact or fiction?

Epidemiologic evidence has shown that the worldwide prevalence of asthma is increasing. The leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) represent a new class of therapy for asthma. They have been developed in the last decade and play a pivotal steroid-sparing role in treating the inflammatory component of asthma. Consequently, reports of Churg-Strauss syndrome (CSS), a rare form of systemic vasculitis, have been recognized as a potential side effect in individuals with moderate to severe asthma on LTRA therapy. The serious nature of this disorder is worthy of prompt recognition by clinicians and aggressive therapy to avoid the subsequent longstanding effects of vasculitis. To validate the postulated linkage between the LTRAs and CSS, this review comprehensively evaluates reported cases in the literature and supports a pathophysiological relationship between the LTRAs and the development of CSS.

Biological effects of montelukast, a cysteinyl-leukotriene receptor-antagonist, on T lymphocytes

BACKGROUND

Montelukast (MNT), a cysteinyl-leukotriene receptor (Cys-LTR) antagonist, has anti-inflammatory activity in the treatment of allergic diseases. If this effect is due only to blocking leukotrienes or also owing to inhibiting proliferation and survival of inflammatory cells, is actually unknown.

OBJECTIVE

Testing the hypothesis that MNT could influence T lymphocyte functional behaviour in vitro.

METHODS

Normal T lymphocytes were analysed for surface expression of Cys-LTR(1) and Cys-LTR(2) by means of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), in the resting state and after activation with T helper type 2 cytokine or T cell receptor (TcR) stimulation. Proliferative activity, as well as IL-4 andIFN-gamma production, were simultaneously determined in samples exposed to molar concentrations of MNT from 10(-8) to 10(-5). Programmed cell death in cultured samples was evaluated by means of propidium iodide and fluorescein isothiocyanate-conjugated anti-Annexin V mAb staining. The complementary DNA microarray technique was adopted to identify gene products involved in apoptosis induction.

RESULTS

Resting T cells expressed low levels of Cys-LTR. Upon anti-CD3 mAb activation, a progressive increase in Cys-LTR(1) and -LTR(2) expression was observed. Exposure to MNT reduced proliferative response to TcR engagement, increased IFN-gamma production and led to apoptosis at minimal concentrations of 10(-6) M. A progressive loss in BAD and B cell lymphoma/leukaemia-2 activities, and an increase in the expression of CD27, TRAF3, TRAIL, p53 and Fas genes were also observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Biological effects of MNT delineate a complex picture of gene activation and repression, probably induced by Cys-LTR blockade. The induction of apoptosis in allergen-specific T cell population, as a final result, appears fundamental in the treatment of asthma.

Addition of formoterol or montelukast to low-dose budesonide: an efficacy comparison in short- and long-term asthma control

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways. Inhaled corticosteroids are very important in anti-inflammatory treatment, but to a great extent they cannot control asthma alone. In addition to corticosteroids, long-acting beta2 agonists and leukotriene antagonists are used for asthma control.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the effect of the addition of formoterol and montelukast on asthma control in patients with moderately persistent asthma who were symptomatic while using a low dose of inhaled budesonide was compared.

METHODS

At the beginning of the study, 40 symptomatic patients with moderately persistent asthma used 400 microg/day budesonide for a 4-week training period, and were then divided randomly into two groups, each composed of 20 persons. For the first group's treatment regime, inhaled formoterol (9 microg) twice a day was added, and for the second group's treatment regime, one-dose oral montelukast (10 microg) was added. These patients were followed up for 8 weeks. The patients' peak expiratory flow (PEF) values measured in the morning and at night, changes in PEF, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, asthma symptom score and the symptom-relieving therapy used during the 12-week study period were recorded and evaluated in the clinic at the very beginning and at the end of each period.

RESULTS

Before the study, the morning PEF value of the group for whom formoterol was added to budesonide (FB) was 266.3 +/- 59.3 liters/min, and in the group for whom montelukast was added to budesonide (MB), it was 262.8 +/- 53.8 liters/min (p > 0.05). After the 8-week treatment period, the morning PEF values were found to be 320.5 +/- 54.4 liters/min in the FB group and 293.3 +/- 52.4 liters/min in the MB group; at the end of the study, it was seen that although there was an increase in morning PEF of 54.2 +/- 15.2 liters/min in the FB group, there was an increase of only 30.5 +/- 25.3 liters/min in the MB group (p < 0.0001). Before the study, night PEF values were 287 +/- 56.6 liters/min in the FB group and 283 +/- 48.5 liters/min in the MB group (p > 0.05). At the end of the treatment, the night PEF values were found to be 331.5 +/- 56.1 liters/min in the FB group and 310 +/- 53.1 liters/min in the MB group. At the end of the study, it was observed that although there was an increase in night PEF of 44.5 +/- 23.3 liters/min in the FB group, there was an increase of only 27 +/- 24.1 liters/min in the MB group (p < 0.001). Although asthma symptom scores and the use of symptom-relieving drugs showed similarities between the two groups at the beginning of the study, after treatment, the FB group had better results than the MB group with respect to these two parameters (p < 0.0001 for both). It was also seen that the two treatments are tolerated equally well.

CONCLUSION

FB treatment, which causes a considerable improvement in lung function, showed better asthma control than MB treatment in patients with moderately persistent asthma.

Maintenance of asthma control by once-daily inhaled ciclesonide in adults with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended therapy for persistent asthma, although side effects can limit appropriate use. Ciclesonide, a novel ICS, is activated in the lung, thereby reducing systemic activity and side effects. This 12-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ciclesonide in adults with persistent asthma.

METHODS

After a 2-week baseline period in which current ICS treatment was continued, 329 patients were randomized to receive ciclesonide 160 microg (n = 107) or 640 microg (n = 112) (ex-actuator doses, equivalent to 200 and 800 microg ex-valve, respectively), or placebo (n = 110) once daily in the morning. Efficacy was monitored by asthma symptom scores, rescue medication use, morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements, spirometry, and probability of study completion without experiencing lack of efficacy.

RESULTS

Morning PEF remained stable with either ciclesonide dose but decreased with placebo; the differences were significant (P < 0.0001) for both ciclesonide doses vs placebo. The forced expiratory volume in 1 s and forced vital capacity decreased significantly with placebo (P < 0.005), but were unchanged with ciclesonide. Lack of efficacy was significantly greater for patients switched to placebo (63%) than it was for those treated with ciclesonide 160 microg (30%) (P < 0.0001 vs placebo) or ciclesonide 640 microg (31%) (P < 0.0001 vs placebo). There were no significant differences between the two tested doses of ciclesonide with respect to efficacy and safety. Serum and 24-h urine cortisol were unaffected by ciclesonide treatment. Both doses of ciclesonide were well tolerated with no cases of oral candidiasis.

CONCLUSION

Ciclesonide (160 or 640 microg) once daily in the morning effectively maintains asthma control, does not affect cortisol levels, and has an adverse event profile comparable with placebo in adults with primarily mild to moderate asthma.

Current and emerging nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory therapies targeting specific mechanisms in asthma and allergy

Today inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are regarded as the first-line controller anti-inflammatory treatment in the management of asthma. However, there is an increasing awareness of the risk of long-term adverse effects of ICS and that asthma is not only an organ-specific disease but also a systemic and small airway disease. This thinking has called for systemic treatment alternatives to treat asthma targeting more disease-specific mechanisms without influencing normal physiologic functions. Blocking of disease-specific mediators is a mechanism utilized by anti-leukotrienes and anti-immunoglobulin E treatment, each proven to be effective in both asthma and allergic rhinitis.Different cytokine-modifying strategies have been tested in clinical trials with variable results, some disappointing and some encouraging. Anti-interleukin (IL)-5 monoclonal antibody treatment effectively reduces the number of eosinophils locally in the airways and in peripheral blood in asthmatic patients. Unfortunately, this marked effect on eosinophils was not associated with an improvement in bronchial hyperresponsiveness and/or symptoms. Clinical trials with a recombinant soluble IL-4 receptor have been somewhat more successful at improving asthma control and allowing reduction of ICS therapy in asthma. Treatment with recombinant IL-12 had an effect on bronchial hyperresponsiveness and eosinophilic response, but was associated with unacceptable adverse effects. Other interesting cytokine-modulating treatments include those targeting IL-9, IL-10, IL-12 and IL-13.Immune-modulating treatment with bacterial antigens represents another strategy, originating from the hypothesis that some bacterial infections guide the immune system towards a T helper (Th) type 1 immune response. Mycobacterium vaccae, Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) and immunostimulatory DNA sequences have all been tested in clinical trials, with encouraging results. Future asthma and allergy treatment will probably include not only one but also two or more disease-modifying agents administered to the same patient.

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.

Asthma guidelines: recommendations versus reality

Highly effective treatments for asthma are now available, but many patients with asthma are still poorly controlled. Guidelines for asthma therapy are widely disseminated, but they may be considered too complex for general use, and clinical studies used to support the guidelines are not indicative of 'real life'. In the 'real' world, patients frequently cannot use their inhaler correctly, particularly pressurised metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) which require good coordination between inhaler activation and patient inhalation. Breath-activated inhalers and dry powder inhalers (DPIs) are much easier to use and result in better lung deposition of the inhaled drug. Surprisingly, two recent Cochrane meta-analyses recommended that pMDIs should be preferentially prescribed, as they have similar efficacy to breath-activated inhalers and DPIs and are cheaper. In reality, DPIs are more cost-effective as they deposit more drug in the lungs, may improve compliance and result in more effective asthma control. Improvements in inhaled drug delivery will continue to be paramount in improving asthma management.

Biofeedback treatment for asthma

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the effectiveness of heart rate variability (HRV) biofeedback as a complementary treatment for asthma.

PATIENTS

Ninety-four adult outpatient paid volunteers with asthma.

SETTING

The psychophysiology laboratory at The University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, and the private outpatient offices of participating asthma physicians.

INTERVENTIONS

The interventions were as follows: (1) a full protocol (ie, HRV biofeedback and abdominal breathing through pursed lips and prolonged exhalation); (2) HRV biofeedback alone; (3) placebo EEG biofeedback; and (4) a waiting list control.

DESIGN

Subjects were first prestabilized using controller medication and then were randomly assigned to experimental groups. Medication was titrated biweekly by blinded asthma specialists according to a protocol based on National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute guidelines, according to symptoms, spirometry, and home peak flows.

MEASUREMENTS

Subjects recorded daily asthma symptoms and twice-daily peak expiratory flows. Spirometry was performed before and after each weekly treatment session under the HRV and placebo biofeedback conditions, and at triweekly assessment sessions under the waiting list condition. Oscillation resistance was measured approximately triweekly.

RESULTS

Compared with the two control groups, subjects in both of the two HRV biofeedback groups were prescribed less medication, with minimal differences between the two active treatments. Improvements averaged one full level of asthma severity. Measures from forced oscillation pneumography similarly showed improvement in pulmonary function. A placebo effect influenced an improvement in asthma symptoms, but not in pulmonary function. Groups did not differ in the occurrence of severe asthma flares.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that HRV biofeedback may prove to be a useful adjunct to asthma treatment and may help to reduce dependence on steroid medications. Further evaluation of this method is warranted.

Montelukast - evaluation in 6 to 14 years old children with persistent asthma - pediatric montelukast study group

OBJECTIVE

The suffering of children with asthma as a persistent illness is present in approximately 10% of the total population. The prevalent treatment regimens available has been the inhaled coticosteroids and short acting bronchodialators. Though the therapies are rational and well accepted but at the cost of side effects on chronic use. The changing definitions and guidelines with regard to asthma have given a classified slot to newer treatments like leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs). The aim of the present study was to study the efficacy and tolerability of montelukast in the treatment of Indian pediatric patients aged 6 to 14 years with chronic asthma.

METHODS

It was a prospective, open, non-comparative multicentric study. 881 Children (Mean age 11.83+/- 3.12 years) were included. Patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were given one mouth dissolving 5 mg montelukast tablet daily in the evening for 30 days.

RESULTS

There was an overall improvement in all the efficacy parameters. The daytime total asthma score decreased from 9.55 +/- 1.52 to 3.59 +/- 2.10. The average number of asthma attacks over the last 4 weeks decreased from 1.14+/- 1.19 to 0.28+/-0.57. The number of nocturnal awakenings fell from 1.54+/-0.78 to 0.43+/-0.54. FEV1 (L) [Predicted] improved by 21.18%). PEFR (L/min.) improved by 34.69%). Approximately 45% physicians rated the treatment as excellent, 30% as very good, 18% as good, 7% as fair and none as poor.

CONCLUSION

Montelukast administered once daily improved efficacy end-points and was well tolerated in pediatric patients with chronic persistent asthma establishing itself as a valuable treatment option to current asthma therapies in 6 to 14 years old patients.

Addition of montelukast or salmeterol to fluticasone for protection against asthma attacks: a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study

BACKGROUND

For patients whose asthma is uncontrolled with low-dose inhaled corticosteroids, addition of alternative therapy instead of increasing the steroid dose is recommended by current treatment guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To compare montelukast, a once-daily leukotriene receptor antagonist, and salmeterol, a twice-daily, long-acting beta-agonist, concomitantly administered with inhaled fluticasone, according to the percentage of patients without an asthma attack for 1 year.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter study was conducted. Adult patients with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma (ages 14-73 years) receiving inhaled fluticasone (220 microg/d) who remained symptomatic during a 4-week run-in period were randomized to the addition of salmeterol (84 microg/d) or montelukast (10 mg/d) for 48 weeks.

RESULTS

Of the 1,473 randomized patients, 743 were randomized to montelukast and 730 to salmeterol; 1,059 patients completed the study. Eighty percent of patients in the montelukast group and 83.3% of patients in the salmeterol group remained attack free during the 48 weeks of treatment (relative risk, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-1.49). Montelukast significantly reduced blood eosinophil counts compared with salmeterol, whereas salmeterol significantly increased prealbuterol forced expiratory volume in 1 second, asthma-specific quality of life, morning peak expiratory flow rate, and decreased nocturnal awakenings compared with montelukast. Differences between treatments were small, and both treatments were generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of montelukast or salmeterol to an inhaled corticosteroid similarly protected most patients from experiencing an asthma attack during a 1-year period, but, based on noninferiority limits, the study was inconclusive with regard to a difference between treatment groups.

Treatment of childhood asthma: how do the available options compare?

The National Asthma Council of Australia suggests that "the aim of preventive therapy should be to enable patients to enjoy a normal life (comparable with that of non-asthmatic children), with the least amount of medication and at minimal risk of adverse events. The level of maintenance therapy should be determined by symptom control and lung function in the interval periods." The British Thoracic Society/Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network states that the aims of the pharmacological treatment of asthma should be to control symptoms, prevent exacerbations and achieve the best possible lung function with minimal adverse effects. We have used the current published international guidelines to highlight the international differences in management recommendations, and compared the possible pharmacological options with a focus on the above ideals. Cromones have been used for many years in childhood asthma. Most evidence suggests they now have little role. Regarding inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), beclomethasone and budesonide are essentially similar in their efficacy. Fluticasone propionate is equally as effective at one-half the equivalent dose of budesonide or beclomethasone. Adverse effects are rare in dosages <400 microg/day of budesonide and beclomethasone or <200 microg/day of fluticasone propionate, but may occur in individual patients. Relevant clinical adverse effects are rare and pharmacological systemic effects are less noticeable with budesonide and fluticasone propionate than with beclomethasone, but data are conflicting. Long-acting beta2-adrenoceptor agonists (beta2-agonists) are recommended once low-dose ICS have failed to control symptoms. The main pharmacological difference between the agents is that formoterol is a full beta2-adrenergic agonist, whereas salmeterol is a partial agonist at the beta2-adrenoceptor and has a unique pharmacological action. The main clinical distinction between these two agents is that their onset of bronchodilation differs. Bronchodilation begins at about 3 minutes after inhalation of formoterol, which is similar to the short-acting agents, whereas salmeterol has a much slower onset of action at about 15-30 minutes. The many in vitro differences between the two drugs are probably not clinically relevant. There are no comparative pediatric data on the leukotriene modifiers to make clear recommendations.

Effects of inhaled corticosteroids, leukotriene receptor antagonists, or both, plus long-acting beta2-agonists on asthma pathophysiology: a review of the evidence

Chronic inflammation and smooth muscle dysfunction are consistent features of asthma, and are responsible for disease progression and airway remodelling. The development of chronic airway inflammation depends upon the recruitment and activation of inflammatory cells and the subsequent release of inflammatory mediators, including cytokines. Cellular and histological evaluation of drugs with anti-inflammatory activity, such as inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), is achieved by analysing samples of lung tissue or biological fluids, obtained by techniques such as bronchial biopsy, bronchoalveolar lavage and sputum induction. These provide valuable information on the inflammatory processes occurring in the lung, although not all are equal in value. The beneficial effects of ICSs in asthma treatment are a consequence of their potent and broad anti-inflammatory properties. Furthermore, there have been promising results indicating that ICSs can reverse some of the structural changes that contribute to airway remodelling. Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs) added to ICSs provide greater clinical efficacy than ICSs alone, suggesting the possibility of complementary activity on the pathophysiological mechanisms of asthma: inflammation and smooth muscle dysfunction. Leukotrienes play a part in the pathogenesis of asthma. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) directly inhibit bronchoconstriction and may have some anti-inflammatory effects, although the extent to which inhibiting one set of inflammatory mediators attenuates the inflammatory response is questionable. In concert with their effect on a broad variety of inflammatory mediators and cells, treatment with ICSs (including ICSs and LABAs) results in superior control of the pathophysiology of asthma and superior clinical efficacy as assessed by the greater improvements in pulmonary function and overall control of asthma compared with LTRAs.

Long-acting beta2-agonists or leukotriene receptor antagonists as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of persistent asthma

It is well accepted that the combination of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting beta2-agonists (LABAs) is effective in achieving asthma control, as it treats both components of asthma pathophysiology, namely inflammation and smooth muscle dysfunction of the airways. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) can also be used as add-ons to ICS therapy in patients whose asthma is not controlled by ICSs alone. The purpose of this review is to compare the effectiveness of ICSs plus LABAs with that of ICSs plus LTRAs for the treatment of persistent asthma that is not controlled by ICSs alone. Several studies have shown that, in comparison with an ICS plus an LTRA, the addition of an LABA to ICS therapy provides greater improvements in pulmonary function and overall control of asthma as measured by use of rescue medication and the number of exacerbations of the asthma, symptom-free days and symptom-free nights. The greater improvements in pulmonary function observed with an ICS plus the LABA, salmeterol, occurred within the first week of treatment (at first treatment assessment), and remained significantly greater than those achieved with an ICS plus an LTRA over the duration of the treatment. Moreover, the salmeterol-fluticasone propionate combination (SFC) produces consistently greater improvements in pulmonary lung function and control of asthma than does the addition of an LTRA to fluticasone propionate. In addition, SFC is a more cost-effective treatment option than fluticasone propionate plus montelukast for patients with asthma that is uncontrolled by ICSs alone. Important cost savings can be made with SFC in clinical practice compared with other combinations of ICSs plus salmeterol or ICSs plus LTRAs.

Recent advances in the management of asthma using leukotriene modifiers

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways that affects approximately 100 million people worldwide. In order to reduce symptoms, improve pulmonary function, and decrease morbidity, current treatment guidelines emphasize the importance of controlling the underlying inflammation in patients with asthma. Leukotrienes are leukocyte-generated lipid mediators that promote airway inflammation. Recognition of the importance of leukotrienes in the pathogenesis of asthma has led to the development of leukotriene modifiers, the first new class of drugs for the treatment of asthma to become available in 25 years. Controlled clinical trials with the four currently used leukotriene modifiers (montelukast, zafirlukast, and zileuton in the US and pranlukast in Japan) have established their efficacy in improving pulmonary function, reducing symptoms, decreasing night-time awakenings, and decreasing the need for rescue medications. They exert anti-inflammatory effects that attenuate cellular infiltration and bronchial hyperresponsiveness and complement the anti-inflammatory properties of inhaled corticosteroids. In patients with moderate and severe asthma, they permit tapering of the corticosteroid dose. In patients with exercise-induced asthma, leukotriene modifiers limit the decline in and quicken the recovery of pulmonary functions without the tolerance issues seen with chronic long-acting beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonist use. In patients with aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid)-induced asthma, they improve pulmonary function and shift the dose response curve to the right, reducing the patient's response to aspirin. In patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis, with or without concomitant asthma, they improve nasal, eye, and throat symptoms as well as quality of life. Leukotriene modifiers are generally safe and well tolerated with adverse effect profiles similar to that of placebo. The one safety issue raised with leukotriene modifiers, Churg-Strauss Syndrome, appears to be the unmasking of an already present syndrome that is manifested when the leukotriene modifiers permit corticosteroid doses to be reduced. Although current treatment guidelines recommend their use in patients with mild persistent asthma, these guidelines were developed just as leukotriene modifiers were coming to the market, before much of the clinical efficacy data were published. Because asthma is a heterogeneous disease, the different asthma phenotypes respond differently to therapies; consequently asthma therapy needs to be individualized. Leukotriene modifiers increase the therapeutic options for patients with asthma and, based on recent data, it is expected that future guidelines will describe expanded uses for these agents in clinical circumstances where these drugs are effective.

Anti-leukotriene agents compared to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Anti-leukotrienes agents are currently being studied as alternative first line agents to inhaled corticosteroids in mild to moderate chronic asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and efficacy of anti-leukotriene agents with inhaled glucocorticoids (ICS) and to determine the dose-equivalence of anti-leukotrienes to daily dose of ICS.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE (1966 to Aug 2003), EMBASE (1980 to Aug 2003), CINAHL (1982 to Aug 2003), the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (August 2003), abstract books, and reference lists of review articles and trials. We contacted colleagues and international headquarters of anti-leukotrienes producers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that compared anti-leukotrienes with inhaled corticosteroids during a minimal 30-day intervention period in asthmatic patients aged 2 years and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality or trials and extracted trial data. The primary outcome was the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids. Secondary outcomes included lung function, indices of chronic asthma control, adverse effects and withdrawal rates.

MAIN RESULTS

27 trials (including 1 trial testing two protocols) met the inclusion criteria; 13 were of high methodological quality; 20 are published in full-text. All trials pertained to patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Only 3 trials focused on children and adolescents. Trial duration varied from 4 to 37 weeks. In most trials, daily dose of ICS was 400 mcg of beclomethasone or equivalent. Patients treated with anti-leukotrienes were 65% more likely to suffer an exacerbation requiring systemic steroids [Relative Risk 1.65; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.36 to 2.00]. Twenty six (95% CI: 17 to 47) patients must be treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids to cause one extra exacerbation. Significant differences favouring ICS were noted in secondary outcomes where()the improvement in FEV(1) reached 130 mL [13 trials; 95% CI: 50, 140 mL ]. Other significant benefits of ICS were seen for symptoms, nocturnal awakenings, rescue medication use, symptom-free days, and quality of life. Anti-leukotriene therapy was associated with 160% increased risk of withdrawals due to poor asthma control. Twenty nine (95% CI 20 to 48) patients must be treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids to cause one extra withdrawal due to poor control. Risk of side effects was not different between groups.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled steroids at a dose of 400 mcg/day of beclomethasone or equivalent are more effective than anti-leukotriene agents given in the usual licensed doses. The exact dose-equivalence of anti-leukotriene agents in mcg of ICS remains to be determined. Inhaled glucocorticoids should remain the first line monotherapy for persistent asthma.

Addition of anti-leukotriene agents to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Anti-leukotriene (AL) agents are being considered as 'add-on' therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), in chronic asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the safety and efficacy of daily AL plus ICS compared to ICS alone, and determine the corticosteroid-sparing effect of AL when added to ICS in chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (until August 2003), reference lists of review articles and trials, contacted international headquarters of AL manufacturers and looked at American Thoracic Society and European Respiratory Society meeting abstracts (1998 to 2003).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of asthmatics aged two years and older with at least one month intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed quality and extracted data independently. Trials were grouped by asthma control at baseline (symptomatic or well-controlled) and dose of ICS in the control group (same or double).

MAIN RESULTS

Of 587 citations, 27 (25 adult and 2 paediatric) trials met inclusion criteria. Sixteen trials were published in full-text and 16 trials reported data in a way that allowed meta-analysis. In symptomatic patients, addition of licensed doses of anti-leukotrienes to ICS resulted in a non-significant reduction in the risk of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids: Relative Risk (RR) 0.64; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.07). A modest improvement group difference in PEF was seen (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) 7.7 L/min; 95% CI 3.6 to 11.8 L/min) together with decrease in use of rescue short-acting beta2-agonist use (WMD 1 puff/week; 95%CI 0.5 to 2). With only 3 trials comparing the use of licensed doses of anti-leukotrienes with increasing the dose of inhaled glucocorticoids, no firm conclusion can be drawn about the equivalence of both treatment options. In ICS-sparing studies of patients who were well controlled at baseline, addition of anti-leukotrienes produced no overall difference in dose of inhaled glucocorticoids (WMD -21 mcg/d, 95%CI -65, 23 mcg/d), but it was associated with fewer withdrawals due to poor asthma control (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.95).

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of licensed doses of anti-leukotrienes to add-on therapy to inhaled glucocorticoids brings modest improvement in lung function. Although addition of anti-leukotrienes to inhaled glucocorticoids appears comparable to increasing the dose of inhaled steroids, the power of the review is insufficient to confirm the equivalence of both treatment options. Addition of anti-leukotrienes is associated with superior asthma control after glucocorticoid tapering; although the glucocorticoid-sparing effect cannot be quantified at present, it appears modest.

Benefit-risk assessment of antileukotrienes in the management of asthma

Antileukotrienes are a relatively new class of anti-asthma drugs that either block leukotriene synthesis (5-lipoxygenase inhibitors) like zileuton, or antagonise the most relevant of their receptors (the cysteinyl leukotriene 1 receptor [CysLT1]) like montelukast, zafirlukast or pranlukast. Hence, their major effect is an anti-inflammatory one. With the exception of pranlukast, the other antileukotrienes have been studied and marketed in the US and Europe for long enough to establish that they are useful drugs in the management of asthma. Their effects, significantly better than placebo, seem more pronounced in subjective measurements (i.e. symptoms scores or quality-of-life tests) than in objective parameters (i.e. forced expiratory volume in 1 second or peak expiratory flow rate). Also, there is some evidence that these drugs work better in some subsets of patients with certain genetic polymorphisms - probably related to their leukotriene metabolism - or patients with certain asthma characteristics. There are a small number of comparative studies only, and with regard to long-term asthma control differences between the agents have not been evaluated. Nevertheless, their overall effect appears comparable with sodium cromoglycate (cromolyn sodium) or theophylline, but significantly less than low-dose inhaled corticosteroids. Antileukotrienes have been shown to have a degree of corticosteroid-sparing effect, but salmeterol appears to perform better as an add-on drug. Montelukast is probably the most useful antileukotriene for continuous treatment of exercise-induced asthma, performing as well as salmeterol without inducing any tolerance. All antileukotrienes are taken orally; their frequency of administration is quite different ranging from four times daily (zileuton) to once daily (montelukast). Antileukotrienes are well tolerated drugs, even though zileuton intake has been related to transitional liver enzyme elevations in some cases. Also Churg-Strauss syndrome (a systemic vasculitis), has been described in small numbers of patients taking CysLT1 antagonists. It is quite probable that this disease appears as a consequence of an 'unmasking' effect when corticosteroid dosages are reduced in patients with severe asthma once CysLT1 antagonists are introduced, but more data are needed to definitely establish the mechanism behind this effect. Overall, however, the benefits of antileukotrienes in the treatment of asthma greatly outweigh their risks.

The role of leukotrienes in asthma

Leukotrienes (LT), both the cysteinyl LTs, LTC(4), LTD(4) and LTE(4), as well as LTB(4) have been implicated in the clinical course, physiologic changes, and pathogenesis of asthma. The cysteinyl LTs are potent bronchoconstrictors, which have additional effects on blood vessels, mucociliary clearance and eosinophilic inflammation. In addition, the cysteinyl LTs are formed from cells commonly associated with asthma, including eosinophils and mast cells. LTB(4), whose role is less well defined in asthma, is a potent chemoattractant (and cell activator) for both neutrophils and eosinophils. In the last 5 years, drugs have been developed which block the actions or formation of these mediators. Clinical and physiologic studies have demonstrated that they are modest short-acting bronchodilators, with sustained improvement in FEV(1) occurring in double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials for up to 6 months. These drugs have demonstrated efficacy in preventing bronchoconstriction caused by LTs, allergen, exercise and other agents. Additionally, there are multiple published studies which have demonstrated improvement in asthma symptoms, beta agonist use and, importantly, exacerbations of asthma in both adults and children. Comparison studies with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) suggest that ICS are superior to leukotriene modifying drugs in moderate persistent asthma. However, several published studies now suggest that leukotriene modifying drugs are effective when added to ongoing therapy with ICS, either to improve current symptoms or to decrease the dose of ICS required to maintain control. While an anti-inflammatory effect is suggested, longer-term, earlier intervention, studies are needed to determine whether these compounds will have any effect on the natural history of the disease.

Comparison of montelukast and budesonide on bronchial reactivity in subjects with mild-moderate persistent asthma

We studied 51 atopic non-smoking subjects who were divided to four treatments groups: (A) montelukast 10mg daily, (B) budesonide 400 microg twice a day (bid), (C) montelukast 10 mg daily plus budesonide 400 microg bid and (D) budesonide 800 microg bid. Bronchial responsiveness was assessed before and after 12 weeks of treatment. The bronchial responsiveness, evaluated by means of PC(20) values, showed a strong significant increase in groups B, C and D, and a weak but significant rise in group A, when compared to basal data. Regarding other pulmonary parameters (FEV(1), PEF) there were no significant differences among the groups after 12 weeks of therapy. A statistical significance was founded after therapy between group A and C (p < 0.05), but not between the group B and D treated with only budesonide at different doses. No significant differences was observed in the side effect pattern among the various treatments. The study data demonstrated that administration of montelukast provided an important and additional effect on bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Oral administration represents a significant advantage over the majority of other anti-asthmatic drugs. Our results confirm the anti-inflammatory properties of both the inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and montelukast and the possible role of these drugs can have on airway remodelling. While currently low dose ICS remains the reference drug as a controller in mild-moderate persistent asthma, montelukast may be viewed as a possible option, either in monotherapy or in association.

Add-on therapy with montelukast or formoterol in patients with the glycine-16 beta2-receptor genotype

AIMS

We assessed whether montelukast or formoterol provides additive effects to asthmatics not controlled on inhaled corticosteroids, by studying patients who were considered to be genetically susceptible to beta2-receptor down regulation and subsensitivity, and who expressed the homozygous glycine-16 beta2-receptor genotype.

METHODS

Fifteen corticosteroid-treated, mild to moderate persistent asthmatics received montelukast 10 mg once daily or formoterol 9 micro g twice daily for 2 weeks, separated by a 2-week placebo run-in and washout, in a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized crossover design. Bronchoprotection against adenosine monophosphate (AMP) challenge (primary endpoint), spirometry and blood eosinophils were measured at trough after placebo, first and last doses.

RESULTS

For AMP PC20vs placebo, there were sustained significant (P < 0.05) doubling dilution improvements following first (1.1; 95% CI 0.4, 1.9) and last (1.0; 95% CI 0.3, 1.8) doses of montelukast, and following first (1.3; 95% CI 0.1, 2.6) but not last (0.3; 95% CI -0.9, 1.6) doses of formoterol. Blood eosinophils (x 10(6) l(-1)) were significantly (P < 0.05) suppressed after the last dose of montelukast (-71; 95% CI -3, -140) compared with placebo, while formoterol exhibited a nonsignificant rise (20; 95% CI -92, 132). Neither treatment significantly improved FEV1, FEF25-75 or PEF after 2 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

In genetically susceptible patients with the homozygous glycine-16 genotype, montelukast, but not formoterol, conferred sustained anti-inflammatory properties in addition to inhaled corticosteroid, which were dissociated from changes in lung function after 2 weeks. Thus, assessing lung function may miss potentially beneficial anti-inflammatory effects of montelukast when used as add-on therapy.

Montelukast improves asthma control in asthmatic children maintained on inhaled corticosteroids

BACKGROUND

Because of potential toxicities of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use in pediatric asthma, alternative or steroid-sparing therapy is desirable. There are no previous studies evaluating montelukast's steroid-sparing effects in children with asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether (1) montelukast as add-on therapy improves asthma symptom control and (2) montelukast provides steroid-sparing effects in children with asthma treated with low to moderate doses of ICS therapy.

METHODS

In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 36 children ages 6 to 14 years with symptomatic asthma maintained on a stable low to moderate dose of ICSs were randomly assigned to receive montelukast or matching placebo for 24 weeks after a run-in period of 2 weeks (period I). During the trial, subjects kept daily asthma diary cards and monthly spirometry was performed. After a 4 week add-on period (period II), the subjects completed a 20-week (period III) ICS tapering period based on a predetermined protocol.

RESULTS

In period II, the difference in the number of rescue-free days was significantly higher in the montelukast group (P = 0.0001), and the number of rescue-free days per week was also significantly higher in montelukast-treated subjects compared with placebo subjects (P = 0.002). In period III, the percentage reduction in ICS dose was not significant between montelukast and placebo (P = 0.10), but the montelukast group experienced an average 17% decrease in ICS dose and the control group experienced an average 64% increase in ICS dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Montelukast treatment significantly increased the number of rescue-free days in symptomatic children with asthma.

Weighing the risks of treatment versus nontreatment in pediatric asthma

During the past dozen years, great strides have been made in the understanding of asthma. In addition, an excellent choice of effective and safe medications has become available for use in both the acute and chronic manifestations of this disease. Unfortunately, asthma continues to affect society adversely in terms of cost and morbidity. Following the NHLBI guidelines for the management of persistent asthma could substantially reduce the health care expenditures associated with asthma and, more importantly could significantly reduce asthma exacerbations, emergent care visits, hospitalizations, and even asthma deaths. All who care for children with asthma must continue to relay the message that asthma is a chronic condition that is best treated with controller agents. Inhaled glucocorticoids are considered first-line agents for all patients with persistent asthma. They have been shown to improve asthma control, improve lung function, and reduce morbidity and mortality. Whether the leukotriene-modifying agents will be shown to reduce morbidity and mortality significantly remains an important and unanswered question at present. Another important question is whether combination therapy and which combination (inhaled glucocorticoid plus LABA or inhaled glucocorticoid plus leukotriene-modifying agent) will provide even further improvement in asthma control and further reductions in hospitalizations and mortality than seen with the use of inhaled glucocorticoids alone.

Combination therapy: appropriate for everyone?

The severity of asthma often varies throughout the course of the disease. At times the symptoms and underlying inflammation that are characteristic of asthma can worsen. Thus during an episode of viral-induced asthma or during a seasonal increase in asthma severity, a patient may be directed to increase his or her dosage of asthma controllers (i.e., inhaled corticosteroid) or add a long-acting bronchodilator (or other controller medications such as antileukotrienes) to manage symptoms, as recommended in guidelines published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Similarly, when symptoms are stable, decreasing dosages or discontinuing certain medications may be appropriate. The recent introduction of a combination product, of a long-acting bronchodilator formulated in the same dry powder device with an inhaled corticosteroid raises new challenges for the step care approach to asthma management recommended by the NIH in 1997. Although unquestionably more convenient for the patient, a combination formulation has the potential to decrease the flexibility required to successfully manage asthma over long periods. In addition, controversy exists regarding long-acting beta-agonists alone because their regular use may mask inflammation in the lung and decrease responsiveness to the bronchodilating effects of rescue medications (i.e., short-acting beta-agonists). The purpose of this article is to help physicians make informed therapeutic decisions for their patients with asthma. It focuses on the advantages and potential disadvantages of using combination products, which contain both an inhaled corticosteroid and a long-acting beta-agonist in the context of the NIH step care approach. Recent publications outlining the use of other add-on controller medications are also discussed.

Management of asthma in adults: current therapy and future directions

Asthma is increasing in prevalence worldwide and results in significant use of healthcare resources. Although most patients with asthma can be adequately treated with inhaled corticosteroids, an important number of patients require additional therapy and an increasing number of options are available. A further minority of patients develop severe persistent asthma which remains difficult to manage despite current pharmacological therapies. This review discusses the various treatment options currently available for each stage of asthma severity, highlights some of the limitations of current management, and outlines directions which may improve the management of asthma in the future.

Second-line controller therapy for persistent asthma uncontrolled on inhaled corticosteroids: the step 3 dilemma

The asthma syndrome is characterised by airway inflammation with associated bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) and reversible airflow obstruction. Therapy has benefited from an enhanced understanding of the pathophysiology of asthma and the resulting guidelines that emphasise the pivotal role of anti-inflammatory inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as first-line therapy. Most patients with mild-to-moderate asthma can be adequately controlled on low-to-medium dosages of ICS alone. For patients with moderate-to-severe asthma who are not adequately controlled by ICS, it is unclear which medication should be added on. The two principal drugs under consideration are long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) and leukotriene antagonists (LTAs). Although both LABAs and LTAs are both effective at improving lung function, reducing symptoms and decreasing exacerbations, important differences exist that may determine the selection of one over the other in particular circumstances. LABAs and LTAs are equally effective at reducing exacerbations and improving symptoms and quality of life when used as add-on therapy. LABAs tend to be more effective bronchodilators than LTAs. Although LABAs stabilise the airway smooth muscle, they do not affect the underlying inflammatory process. Their long-term use also leads to subsensitivity of response to both LABAs and short-acting beta(2)-agonists (SABAs). The subsensitivity of response to SABAs is more pronounced in the presence of acute bronchoconstriction, which could be relevant during an acute attack. When combined with an ICS, LTAs provide additive non-steroidal anti-inflammatory properties and alleviate associated BHR, but do not induce subsensitivity of response. Not only is the efficacy of LTAs maintained over time, but also they do not affect the response to SABAs as reliever therapy. LTAs also have beneficial effects in patients who have concomitant allergic rhinitis, thus treating the unified airway. The choice between LABA and LTA as add-on therapy will therefore be determined by the needs of the individual patient in terms of providing anti-inflammatory versus bronchodilatory control. For patients with poor lung function where bronchodilatation is required, then an LABA would seem to be a logical choice. For the patient whose lung function is less impaired, with evidence of ongoing BHR where bronchoprotection is needed (e.g. exercise, allergen, cold air), or when there is concomitant allergic rhinitis, then an LTA would be more suitable.

Effect of the addition of montelukast to inhaled fluticasone propionate on airway inflammation

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of addition of montelukast to inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) therapy, compared with FP therapy alone (100 microg twice a day) on airway immunopathology in individuals with mild asthma. Twenty-eight subjects received FP (100 microg twice a day) or FP (100 microg twice a day) plus montelukast (10 mg at night) for 8 weeks and were then crossed over to the alternate treatment for a further 8 weeks. Physiological measurements and bronchial biopsies were obtained at +/- 2 days before treatment and +/- 2 days at the end of each treatment period. A two-period crossover analysis was performed and the mean and SE were calculated. There was no significant difference in percent predicted FEV1 (p = 0.51) or PC20 mg/ml (p = 0.81) between the two treatment regimes after 8 weeks of therapy. There was no difference in the efficacy of either treatment in decreasing T cell (p = 0.97), CD45RO+ (p = 0.37), mast cell (p = 0.37), or activated eosinophils (p = 0.55) numbers in bronchial biopsies. There was no significant difference in the percentage area stained for IFN-gamma (p = 0.76) or interleukin-4 (p = 0.61) between treatments. Reduction of inflammatory cell numbers in the bronchial mucosa achieved with FP plus montelukast was not significantly different from the reduction observed with FP alone in individuals with mild asthma.

Randomised controlled trial of montelukast plus inhaled budesonide versus double dose inhaled budesonide in adult patients with asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) affect many inflammatory pathways in asthma but have little impact on cysteinyl leukotrienes. This may partly explain persistent airway inflammation during chronic ICS treatment and failure to achieve adequate asthma control in some patients. This double blind, randomised, parallel group, non-inferiority, multicentre 16 week study compared the clinical benefits of adding montelukast to budesonide with doubling the budesonide dose in adults with asthma.

METHODS

After a 1 month single blind run in period, patients inadequately controlled on inhaled budesonide (800 microg/day) were randomised to receive montelukast 10 mg + inhaled budesonide 800 microg/day (n=448) or budesonide 1600 microg/day (n=441) for 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Both groups showed progressive improvement in several measures of asthma control compared with baseline. Mean morning peak expiratory flow (AM PEF) improved similarly in the last 10 weeks of treatment compared with baseline in both the montelukast + budesonide group and in the double dose budesonide group (33.5 v 30.1 l/min). During days 1-3 after start of treatment, the change in AM PEF from baseline was significantly greater in the montelukast + budesonide group than in the double dose budesonide group (20.1 v 9.6 l/min, p<0.001), indicating faster onset of action in the montelukast group. Both groups showed similar improvements with respect to "as needed" beta agonist use, mean daytime symptom score, nocturnal awakenings, exacerbations, asthma free days, peripheral eosinophil counts, and asthma specific quality of life. Both montelukast + budesonide and double dose budesonide were generally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The addition of montelukast to inhaled budesonide is an effective and well tolerated alternative to doubling the dose of inhaled budesonide in adult asthma patients experiencing symptoms and inadequate control on budesonide alone.

Effect of montelukast added to inhaled budesonide on control of mild to moderate asthma

BACKGROUND

Proinflammatory leukotrienes, which are not completely inhibited by inhaled corticosteroids, may contribute to asthmatic problems [corrected]. A 16 week multicentre, randomised, double blind, controlled study was undertaken to study the efficacy of adding oral montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, to a constant dose of inhaled budesonide.

METHODS

A total of 639 patients aged 18-70 years with forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) > or =55% predicted and a minimum predefined level of asthma symptoms during a 2 week placebo run in period were randomised to receive montelukast 10 mg (n=326) or placebo (n=313) once daily for 16 weeks. All patients received a constant dose of budesonide (400-1600 microg/day) by Turbuhaler throughout the study.

RESULTS

Mean FEV(1) at baseline was 81% predicted. The median percentage of asthma exacerbation days was 35% lower (3.1% v 4.8%; p=0.03) and the median percentage of asthma free days was 56% higher (66.1% v 42.3%; p=0.001) in the montelukast group than in the placebo group. Patients receiving concomitant treatment with montelukast had significantly (p<0.05) fewer nocturnal awakenings and significantly (p<0.05) greater improvements in beta agonist use and morning peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with mild airway obstruction and persistent asthma symptoms despite budesonide treatment, concomitant treatment with montelukast significantly improves asthma control.

Leukotriene receptor antagonists in asthma therapy

In persons with asthma, the cysteinyl leukotrienes possess multiple inflammatory properties in vitro and have long been considered to be a potentially important mediator of asthma and an attractive target for therapeutic intervention. Controlled clinical trials have documented the efficacy of leukotriene receptor antagonists in asthma treatment, but reservations about their use for asthma therapy center on two main issues: the heterogeneity of patient responses and their reduced potency relative to other asthma medications. For example, leukotriene receptor antagonists also have been shown to be less efficacious than inhaled corticosteroids for several end points, including symptom relief, reduced markers of inflammation, and improved pulmonary function. This review explores several underappreciated aspects of asthma therapy: heterogeneity of patient responses to medication, the failure of symptoms to correlate with commonly used end points, and the potential of delivery to distal airways for producing important and novel benefits.

Steroid-sparing effects of fluticasone propionate 100 microg and salmeterol 50 microg administered twice daily in a single product in patients previously controlled with fluticasone propionate 250 microg administered twice daily

BACKGROUND

Concurrent use of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and an inhaled long-acting beta2-agonist provides better overall asthma control than the use of higher doses of ICS alone.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether fluticasone propionate (FP) combined with salmeterol in the Diskus device can be used to reduce the dose of ICS in patients currently stable on medium-dose ICS while maintaining asthma control.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 12- to 24-week trial consisting of a 3-part run-in period. The run-in period was designed to first establish FP 250 microg administered twice a day (bid) via Diskus as the minimum effective dose. During run-in period 1, patients received FP 220 microg bid or the equivalent for 10 to 14 days. Controlled patients moved to run-in period 2 (5-28 days), which assessed asthma stability on FP 100 microg bid administered via Diskus. Only patients who became unstable on FP 100 microg bid were eligible to enter run-in period 3 (26-30 days), during which they were placed on FP 250 microg bid and those regaining asthma control were eligible for randomization. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who remained in the study with no evidence of worsening asthma. Secondary efficacy measures included FEV1, morning peak expiratory flow, percent of symptom-free days, and daily albuterol use.

RESULTS

Only 5% of patients treated with FP100/salmeterol withdrew because of worsening asthma in the first 12 weeks; this compared with 7% in the FP250 group. All patients from a subset of sites continued in the study for an additional 12 weeks; only an additional 1% of patients treated with either FP100/salmeterol or FP250 withdrew because of worsening asthma. Secondary efficacy measures confirmed primary efficacy results.

CONCLUSION

In patients requiring FP250 bid for asthma stability, FP100/salmeterol bid was steroid-sparing, allowing a 60% reduction in the FP dose while maintaining overall asthma control.

Leukotriene receptor antagonists in the treatment of asthma: an update

Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs), such as montelukast and zafirlukast, have been demonstrated in a number of studies to possess bronchodilating and anti-inflammatory properties, that make these drugs ideal candidates for the treatment of asthma. The last 1998-updating of the GINA Guidelines for the diagnosis and therapy of asthma recommends the use of LTRAs in the treatment of moderate and mild asthma. In patients with moderate asthma not completely controlled with moderate doses of inhaled corticosteroids, the addition of a LTRA is indicated in alternative to either the increase of the inhaled corticosteroid dose or the addition of an inhaled long-acting beta2-agonist. Both in vitro and in vivo evidences indicate that LTRAs possess an anti-inflammatory activity that is presumably complementary to that presented by corticosteroids. Moreover, clinical studies show that the addition of an LTRA, montelukast, is able to improve clinical and functional indexes in patients with asthma not controlled with inhaled corticosteroids, and to allow a reduction in corticosteroid dosage in patients with asthma well controlled by inhaled corticosteroids. In patients with mild persistent asthma monotherapy with an LTRA is indicated in alternative to a low-dose inhaled corticosteroid, an inhaled cromone, or an oral slow-release theophylline. Previous clinical studies in patients with mild to moderate asthma had demonstrated that monotherapy with LTRAs is able to improve airway function, asthma symptoms, use of as-needed medications, exacerbation rate, and quality of life, without evidence of tolerance with prolonged use. Recently, in a subgroup analysis of patients with mild persistent asthma, a 6-week treatment with oral montelukast or inhaled beclomethasone gave similar improvements in "rescue-free" days, days with well controlled asthma, FEV1, blood eosinophils, beta-agonist use, and nocturnal awakes due to asthma.

Asthma control and patient satisfaction among early pediatric users of montelukast

OBJECTIVE

To assess asthma control and patient satisfaction among pediatric users of montelukast in a clinical practice setting.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective study of 175 children with persistent asthma, 6 to 14 years of age, who initiated treatment with montelukast between Feb-1998 and Aug-1998, in primary care and pediatric offices across the United States. Data on asthma control and satisfaction with treatment was collected in physicians' offices after enrollment and by survey to the patients' homes at 1 month of treatment.

RESULTS

Across the study population, improvements in mean scores for asthma control and parent satisfaction were observed at the 1-month follow-up compared with baseline. At 1 month, 57.7% of patients had none offour issues indicative of poor asthma control, compared with 19.4% at baseline. Similarly, after 1 month of treatment with montelukast, 2.7 times as many parents reported being very satisfied with asthma therapy (using montelukast) compared with the previous controller therapy regimen at baseline. During the 1-month follow-up period, montelukast was used as the only controller medication by 18.3% of patients, and in combination with another controller medication by 81.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Observations from this study over one month suggest that a significant percentage of pediatric patients successfully managed their asthma with montelukast and their parents were satisfied with their medication, compared to baseline.

Management of persistent symptoms in patients with asthma

The main goals of asthma therapy are to control symptoms, prevent acute attacks, and maintain lung function as close to normal as possible. Customizing the regimen to relieve the patient's symptoms and control airway inflammation is important. If asthma is not well controlled, an initial inhaled corticosteroid boost will treat the underlying heightened airway inflammation, and the addition of a long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist or leukotriene receptor antagonist will rapidly control symptoms. Most patients do not require prolonged treatment with expensive combination or additive agents. Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction is a common source of symptoms. Treatments for scheduled and unscheduled exercises differ. Inhaled corticosteroids prevent frequent and severe asthma exacerbations. When patients have persistent symptoms despite a pharmacological regimen, environmental factors and nonpharmacological interventions must be considered before medication is increased. When an inhaled corticosteroid is being considered, issues of compliance, drug delivery device, and proper inhaler techniques are as important as issues of potency, clinical efficacy, and adverse effects. The new hydrofluoroalkane preparations offer more lung deposition and may be important in treating inflammation of the small airways in patients with asthma.

Effects of varying doses of fluticasone propionate on the physiology and bronchial wall immunopathology in mild-to-moderate asthma

OBJECTIVES

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are typically associated with a flat dose-response curve when traditional efficacy values are examined (eg, FEV(1)). The aim of the present study was to investigate if a dose-response relationship exists for lung function and inflammatory cell numbers in bronchial biopsy specimens.

METHODS

Bronchial biopsy specimens were obtained from 36 patients randomized to receive 100 micro g, 500 microg, or 2,000 microg/d of fluticasone propionate (FP). Lung physiology and bronchial biopsies were performed at baseline and after 2 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Improvement in lung function and suppression of airway inflammation were optimal at a dose of 500 microg/d of FP. Significant changes from baseline following treatment were documented in FEV(1) (p = 0.02), forced expiratory flow (p = 0.002), FEV(1)/FVC (p = 0.007), provocative concentration of histamine causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PC(20)) [p = 0.02], T-cell numbers (p = 0.0005), activated eosinophils (p = 0.01), and numbers of macrophages (p = 0.01) in the group treated with 500 microg/d of FP. Comparison between groups administered different doses of FP failed to demonstrate a dose-response relationship for change from baseline in PC(20) (p = 0.43), any of the lung function parameters, T-cell numbers (p = 0.64), activated T cells (p = 0.46), eosinophils (p = 0.53), activated eosinophils (p = 0.48), or macrophage numbers (p = 0.68).

CONCLUSION

The apparent lack of a dose-response for ICS treatment in patients with asthma further validates the preferential use of add-on therapy over increasing the dose of ICS.