Comparable long-term safety and efficacy of a novel budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler versus budesonide/formoterol Turbuhaler in adolescents and adults with asthma

A Pilot Study of the Normative Range of Overnight Urinary Free Cortisol Corrected for Creatinine in Children

BACKGROUND

For more than a decade, urinary free cortisol corrected for creatinine (OUFCC) has been used to assess the systemic bioactivity of inhaled corticosteroids in children with asthma. Paediatric normative ranges, however, have not been established. The aim of the present study was to define a preliminary range for OUFCC in Tanner stage 1 children.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis was performed of 26 Tanner stage one children (aged 5-11 years) with mild asthma only requiring prn (pro re nata) treatment with short-acting β₂-agonists, who participated in a 3-way cross-over knemometry study. The study comprised a run-in, two washout periods and three treatment periods (2 weeks each). Urine was collected at the end of each period. A normative range was derived using the 95% prediction interval for the geometric mean OUFCC, calculated from run-in and washout periods.

RESULTS

Twenty-six children contributed 41 OUFCC values. The geometric mean OUFCC was 9.0 nmol/mmol (95% PI: 3.6, 22.7 nmol/mmol).

CONCLUSIONS

The OUFCC preliminary normative range was 3.6 to 22.7 nmol/mmol in Tanner stage one children. A larger study in healthy children is warranted to confirm these findings and to assess potential differences in OUFCC across developmental stages and age groups, and by gender and race.

EUDRACT NUMBER

2013-004719-32, CLINICALTRIALS.

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT02063139.

Long-acting β2-adrenoreceptor agonists suppress type 1 interferon expression in human plasmacytoid dendritic cells via epigenetic regulation

The combination of inhaled long-acting β2-adrenoreceptor (LABA) and inhaled glucocorticoid (ICS) is a major therapy for asthma. However, the increased risk of infection is still a concern. Plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) are the predominant cells producing type 1 interferon (IFN) against infection. The effect of LABA/ICS on type 1 IFN expression in human pDCs is unknown. Circulating pDCs were isolated from healthy human subjects and were pretreated with glucocorticoid (GCS), LABA or a cAMP analog, and were stimulated with Toll-like receptor (TLR) agonist CpG (TLR9) or imiquimod (TLR7) in the presence of IL-3. The expression of type 1 IFN (IFN-α/β) were measured by ELISA. The mechanisms were investigated using receptor antagonists, pathway inhibitors, Western blotting and chromatin immunoprecipitation. GCS suppressed TLR-induced IFN-α expression, and LABA enhanced the suppressive effect. LABA alone also suppressed TLR-induced IFN-α/β expression, and the effect was reversed by the β2-adrenoreceptor antagonist ICI118551. Dibutyryl-cAMP, a cAMP analog, conferred a similar suppressive effect, and the effect was abrogated by the exchange protein directly activated by cAMP (Epac) inhibitor HJC0197 or intracellular free Ca²⁺ chelator BAPTA-AM. Formoterol suppressed TLR-induced phosphorylation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)-p38/ERK. Formoterol suppressed interferon regulatory factor (IRF)-3/IRF-7 expression. Formoterol suppressed CpG-induced translocation of H3K4 specific methyltransferase WDR5 and suppressed H3K4 trimethylation in the IFNA and IFNB gene promoter region. LABA suppressed TLR7/9-induced type 1 IFNs production, at least partly, via the β₂-adrenoreceptor-cAMP-Epac-Ca²⁺, IRF-3/IRF-7, the MAPK-p38/ERK pathway, and epigenetic regulation by suppressing histone H3K4 trimethylation through inhibiting the translocation of WDR5 from cytoplasm to nucleus. LABA may interfere with anti-viral immunity.

Asthma and COPD: Similarities and Differences in the Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Therapy

Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are two of the most common chronic lung diseases worldwide. Distinguishing between these different pulmonary diseases can be difficult in practice because of symptomatic similarities. A definitive diagnosis is essential for correct treatment. This review article presents the different symptoms of these two chronic inflammatory lung diseases following a selective search of the PubMed database for relevant literature published between 1996 and 2012. While cough occurs in both diseases, asthmatics often have a dry cough mainly at night, which is often associated with allergies. In contrast, COPD is usually caused by years of smoking. Paroxysmal dyspnea, which occurs in asthma, is characterized by shortness of breath, while in COPD it occurs during physical exertion in early stages and at rest in later stages of the disease. Asthma often begins in childhood or adolescence, whereas COPD occurs mainly in smokers in later life. It is possible to live with asthma into old age, whereas the life expectancy of patients with COPD is significantly limited. Currently, there is no general curative treatment for either disorder.

Addition of long-acting beta2-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in children

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are increasingly prescribed for children with asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and efficacy of adding a LABA to an ICS in children and adolescents with asthma. To determine whether the benefit of LABA was influenced by baseline severity of airway obstruction, the dose of ICS to which it was added or with which it was compared, the type of LABA used, the number of devices used to deliver combination therapy and trial duration.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Asthma Trials Register until January 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials testing the combination of LABA and ICS versus the same, or an increased, dose of ICS for at least four weeks in children and adolescents with asthma. The main outcome was the rate of exacerbations requiring rescue oral steroids. Secondary outcomes included markers of exacerbation, pulmonary function, symptoms, quality of life, adverse events and withdrawals.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed studies independently for methodological quality and extracted data. We obtained confirmation from trialists when possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review a total of 33 trials representing 39 control-intervention comparisons and randomly assigning 6381 children. Most participants were inadequately controlled on their current ICS dose. We assessed the addition of LABA to ICS (1) versus the same dose of ICS, and (2) versus an increased dose of ICS.LABA added to ICS was compared with the same dose of ICS in 28 studies. Mean age of participants was 11 years, and males accounted for 59% of the study population. Mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) at baseline was ≥ 80% of predicted in 18 studies, 61% to 79% of predicted in six studies and unreported in the remaining studies. Participants were inadequately controlled before randomisation in all but four studies.There was no significant group difference in exacerbations requiring oral steroids (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.28, 12 studies, 1669 children; moderate-quality evidence) with addition of LABA to ICS compared with ICS alone. There was no statistically significant group difference in hospital admissions (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.36, seven studies, 1292 children; moderate-quality evidence)nor in serious adverse events (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.85, 17 studies, N = 4021; moderate-quality evidence). Withdrawals occurred significantly less frequently with the addition of LABA (23 studies, 471 children, RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.94; low-quality evidence). Compared with ICS alone, addition of LABA led to significantly greater improvement in FEV1 (nine studies, 1942 children, inverse variance (IV) 0.08 L, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.10; mean difference (MD) 2.99%, 95% CI 0.86 to 5.11, seven studies, 534 children; low-quality evidence), morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) (16 studies, 3934 children, IV 10.20 L/min, 95% CI 8.14 to 12.26), reduction in use of daytime rescue inhalations (MD -0.07 puffs/d, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.02, seven studies; 1798 children) and reduction in use of nighttime rescue inhalations (MD -0.08 puffs/d, 95% CI -0.13 to -0.03, three studies, 672 children). No significant group difference was noted in exercise-induced % fall in FEV1, symptom-free days, asthma symptom score, quality of life, use of reliever medication and adverse events.A total of 11 studies assessed the addition of LABA to ICS therapy versus an increased dose of ICS with random assignment of 1628 children. Mean age of participants was 10 years, and 64% were male. Baseline mean FEV1 was ≥ 80% of predicted. All trials enrolled participants who were inadequately controlled on a baseline inhaled steroid dose equivalent to 400 µg/d of beclomethasone equivalent or less.There was no significant group differences in risk of exacerbation requiring oral steroids with the combination of LABA and ICS versus a double dose of ICS (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.85 to 3.32, three studies, 581 children; moderate-quality evidence) nor in risk of hospital admission (RR 1.90, 95% CI 0.65 to 5.54, four studies, 1008 children; moderate-quality evidence).No statistical significant group difference was noted in serious adverse events (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.94, seven studies, N = 1343; moderate-quality evidence) and no statistically significant differences in overall risk of all-cause withdrawals (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.37, eight studies, 1491 children; moderate-quality evidence). Compared with double the dose of ICS, use of LABA was associated with significantly greater improvement in morning PEF (MD 8.73 L/min, 95% CI 5.15 to 12.31, five studies, 1283 children; moderate-quality evidence), but data were insufficient to aggregate on other markers of asthma symptoms, rescue medication use and nighttime awakening. There was no group difference in risk of overall adverse effects, A significant group difference was observed in linear growth over 12 months, clearly indicating lower growth velocity in the higher ICS dose group (two studies: MD 1.21 cm/y, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.70).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In children with persistent asthma, the addition of LABA to ICS was not associated with a significant reduction in the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, but it was superior for improving lung function compared with the same or higher doses of ICS. No differences in adverse effects were apparent, with the exception of greater growth with the use of ICS and LABA compared with a higher ICS dose. The trend towards increased risk of hospital admission with LABA, irrespective of the dose of ICS, is a matter of concern and requires further monitoring.

Real-world effects of two inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist combinations in the treatment of asthma

OBJECTIVE

There are several inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-agonist (ICS/LABA) combinations currently used to treat asthmatic patients, but the differences in the clinical effects of these ICS/LABAs are currently unknown. We herein evaluated the effects of two currently available ICS/LABA combinations in a real-world setting.

METHODS

A fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combined Discus inhaler (FP/SM; 250/50 μg bid) was switched to a budesonide/formoterol Turbuhaler inhaler (BUD/FM; 160/4.5 μg two inhalations bid) and FP/SM (500/50 μg bid) was also switched to BUD/FM (160/4.5 μg four inhalations bid) in symptomatic asthmatic patients treated with FP/SM over 20 years of age.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled in this study, and the scores of the asthma control test (ACT) and asthma control questionnaire-5 item version (ACQ5) were significantly improved 4 and 8 weeks after the switch to ICS/LABA treatments, and well-controlled asthma (ACQ5 score <0.75) and good control (ACT score >20) was achieved in 54 (90%) and 40 (66.7%) patients, respectively, at 8 weeks. The spirometric analysis revealed significant improvements of the values of the peak expiratory flow (PEF) and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) after switching from FP/SM to BUD/FM, and significantly improved small airway impairments ([Formula: see text]50 and [Formula: see text]25) were observed in patients treated with high-dose ICS/LABA. These subjective and objective improvements were also seen in patients aged over 65 years old.

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrated that changing the combined ICS/LABA inhaler from FP/SM to BUD/FM can lead to more effective management of symptomatic patients with asthma, especially in patients treated with high-dose ICS/LABA.

Efficacy and safety of maintenance and reliever combination budesonide-formoterol inhaler in patients with asthma at risk of severe exacerbations: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The Single combination budesonide-formoterol inhaler Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (SMART) regimen reduces severe asthma exacerbations in patients, but whether the high doses of corticosteroid and β agonist increase the risk of adverse effects with both short-term and cumulative exposure is not certain. Our aim was to investigate whether the SMART regimen would reduce the risk of overuse of β agonist, reduce the likelihood of patients to seek medical review when such episodes occurred, and if any reduction in severe asthma exacerbations would be at the cost of a higher burden of systemic corticosteroid.

METHODS

In this 24-week trial undertaken at four primary health-care practices and one hospital in New Zealand, patients (aged 16-65 years) with a recent asthma exacerbation were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the SMART or standard fixed-dose regimen. Treatment in the SMART group consisted of two actuations of budesonide-formoterol (200 μg and 6 μg, respectively, per actuation) twice daily, delivered through a combination metered dose inhaler (MDI), with one extra actuation as needed for relief of symptoms; treatment in the standard group consisted of two actuations of budesonide-formoterol (200 μg and 6 μg, respectively, per actuation) twice daily through a combination MDI with one to two actuations of salbutamol (100 μg per actuation) by MDI as needed for relief of symptoms. MDIs were monitored electronically to measure actual use of medication. The allocation sequence for randomisation was computer generated, with a block size of eight per site. Participants, investigators, and the statistician were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with at least one high-use episode of β agonist (more than eight actuations per day of budesonide-formoterol in addition to the four maintenance doses in the SMART group or more than 16 actuations per day of salbutamol in the standard group). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12610000515099.

FINDINGS

303 patients were randomly assigned to the SMART (n=151) or standard group (n=152). No significant difference was noted between the SMART and standard groups in the proportion of participants with at least one high-use episode of β agonist (84 [56%] vs 68 [45%], respectively, relative risk 1·24 [95% CI 0·99-1·56]; p=0·058). There were fewer days of high use in the SMART group (mean 5·1 days [SD 14·3] vs 8·9 days [20·9], relative rate 0·58 [0·39-0·88]; p=0·01). Of the patients who had at least one high-use episode, those in the SMART group had fewer days of high use without medical review (8·5 days [17·8] vs 18·3 days [24·8], 0·49 [0·31-0·75]; p=0·001). The SMART regimen resulted in higher inhaled corticosteroid exposure (943·5 μg budesonide per day [1502·5] vs 684·3 μg budesonide per day [390·5], respectively; ratio of means 1·22 [1·06-1·41]; p=0·006), but reduced oral corticosteroid exposure (77·5 mg prednisone [240·5] vs 126·6 mg prednisone [382·1], respectively; p=0·011), with no significant difference in composite systemic corticosteroid exposure (793·7 mg prednisone equivalent per year [893·1] vs 772·1 mg prednisone equivalent per year [1062·7], respectively; 1·03 [0·86-1·22]; p=0·76). Participants in the SMART group had fewer severe asthma exacerbations (35 [weighted mean rate per year 0·53] vs 66 [0·97]; relative rate 0·54 [0·36-0·82]; p=0·004).

INTERPRETATION

The SMART regimen has a favourable risk-to-benefit profile and can be recommended for use in adults at risk of severe asthma exacerbations.

FUNDING

Health Research Council of New Zealand.

Asthma outcomes: exacerbations

BACKGROUND

The goals of asthma treatment include preventing recurrent exacerbations. Yet there is no consensus about the terminology for describing or defining "exacerbation" or about how to characterize an episode's severity.

OBJECTIVE

National Institutes of Health institutes and other federal agencies convened an expert group to propose how asthma exacerbation should be assessed as a standardized asthma outcome in future asthma clinical research studies.

METHODS

We used comprehensive literature reviews and expert opinion to compile a list of asthma exacerbation outcomes and classified them as either core (required in future studies), supplemental (used according to study aims and standardized), or emerging (requiring validation and standardization). This work was discussed at a National Institutes of Health-organized workshop in March 2010 and finalized in September 2011.

RESULTS

No dominant definition of "exacerbation" was found. The most widely used definitions included 3 components, all related to treatment, rather than symptoms: (1) systemic use of corticosteroids, (2) asthma-specific emergency department visits or hospitalizations, and (3) use of short-acting β-agonists as quick-relief (sometimes referred to as "rescue" or "reliever") medications.

CONCLUSIONS

The working group participants propose that the definition of "asthma exacerbation" be "a worsening of asthma requiring the use of systemic corticosteroids to prevent a serious outcome." As core outcomes, they propose inclusion and separate reporting of several essential variables of an exacerbation. Furthermore, they propose the development of a standardized, component-based definition of "exacerbation" with clear thresholds of severity for each component.

Long-term safety and asthma control measures with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler in African American asthmatic patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Information surrounding the long-term safety of combination inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β(2)-adrenergic agonist medications in African American asthmatic patients is limited.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess safety and asthma control with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) versus budesonide over 1 year in African American patients.

METHODS

This 52-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3B safety study (NCT00419952) was conducted in 742 self-reported African American patients 12 years or older with moderate-to-severe asthma previously receiving medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids. After 2 weeks using a 320 μg twice-daily budesonide pMDI, patients were randomized 1:1 to 320/9 μg twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI or 320 μg twice-daily budesonide pMDI.

RESULTS

Both treatments were well tolerated. Asthma exacerbation incidence and rate (per patient-treatment year) were lower with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide (incidence, 7.7% vs 14.0% [P= .006]; rate ratio, 0.615 [P= .002]). Time to first asthma exacerbation was longer (P= .018) with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide. The most common adverse events, regardless of study drug relationship, were headache (9.5% and 7.7%), nasopharyngitis (6.9% and 8.0%), sinusitis (4.0% and 6.3%), and viral upper respiratory tract infection (5.8% and 4.4%) for budesonide/formoterol and budesonide, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 12 and 15 patients, respectively; none were considered drug related. No substantial or unexpected patterns of abnormalities were observed in laboratory, electrocardiographic, or Holter monitoring assessments. Hospitalization caused by asthma exacerbation occurred in 0 and 4 patients in the budesonide/formoterol and budesonide groups, respectively. Pulmonary function and asthma control measures generally favored budesonide/formoterol.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population budesonide/formoterol pMDI was well tolerated over 12 months, with a safety profile similar to that of budesonide; the asthma exacerbation rate was reduced by 38.5% versus budesonide.

New approaches to managing asthma: a US perspective

Despite remarkable advances in diagnosis and long-term management, asthma remains a serious public health concern. Newly updated expert guidelines emphasize the intra- and inter-individual variability of asthma and highlight the importance of periodic assessment of asthma control. These guidelines update recommendations for step-wise asthma treatment, address the burgeoning field of asthma diagnostics, and stress the importance of a patient and health care professional partnership, including written action plans and self monitoring. The field of asthma therapeutics is expanding rapidly, with promising new treatment options available or in development that may address some of the existing barriers to successful asthma management. These approaches simplify treatment, use combinations of agents in one delivery device that have complementary actions, or target specific pathways involved in asthma patho-physiology. Considerable activity is taking place in asthma pharmacogenetics. This review provides an overview of these new approaches to managing asthma, including their present status and future potential.

Long-term safety of mometasone furoate/formoterol combination for treatment of patients with persistent asthma

Objective: The combination of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting β₂-agonist is recommended for treatment of patients with persistent asthma inadequately controlled on ICS monotherapy. This study was conducted to evaluate the long-term safety of mometasone furoate/formoterol (MF/F) administered through metered-dose inhaler (MDI) in patients with persistent asthma previously on medium- to high-dose ICS. Methods: This was a 52-week, randomized, multicenter, parallel-group, open-label, evaluator-blinded study. At baseline, 404 patients (aged >12 years) were stratified according to their previous ICS dose (medium or high), then randomized 2:1 to receive twice-daily treatment of MF/F (200/10 or 400/10 μg) or fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/S; 250/50 or 500/50 μg). The primary endpoint was the number and percentage of patients reporting any adverse event (AE). Additional safety evaluations included plasma cortisol 24-hour area under the curve (AUC_0–24h) and ocular changes. Pulmonary function, asthma symptoms, and use of rescue medication were monitored. Results: The incidence of >1 treatment-emergent AE was similar across treatment groups (MF/F 200/10 μg, 77.3% [n = 109]; FP/S 250/50 μg, 82.4% [n = 56]; MF/F 400/10 μg, 79.2% [n = 103]; FP/S 500/50 μg, 76.9% [n = 50]). Rates of treatment-related AEs were also similar across treatment groups (MF/F 200/10 μg, 28.4%; FP/S 250/50 μg, 23.5%; MF/F 400/10 μg, 23.1%; FP/S 500/50 μg, 20.0%). Headache (3.7%) and dysphonia (2.7%) were the most common treatment-related AEs overall. The nature and frequency of AEs and the decreases in plasma cortisol AUC_{0–24 h} observed with MF/F treatment were similar to those observed with FP/S treatment. Ocular events were rare (2–6% overall incidence among treatment groups); in particular, no posterior subcapsular cataracts were reported. Only three patients discontinued the study because of treatment-related ocular AEs (two for lens disorders in the MF/F 400/10 μg group; one for reduced visual acuity in the FP/S 250/50 μg group) and no asthma-related deaths occurred. Furthermore, MF/F showed numerical improvement in lung function and clinical benefits by reducing asthma symptoms and rescue medication use. Conclusions: One-year treatment with the new combination therapies -twice-daily MF/F-MDI 200/10 and 400/10 μg — is safe and well tolerated in patients with persistent asthma.

Budesonide/formoterol combination in COPD: a US perspective

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a preventable and treatable disease of the lung caused primarily by exposure to cigarette smoke. Clinically, it presents with progressive cough, sputum production, dyspnea, reduced exercise capacity, and diminished quality of life. Physiologically, it is characterized by the presence of partially reversible expiratory airflow limitation and hyperinflation. Pathologically, COPD is a multicomponent disease characterized by bronchial submucosal mucous gland hypertrophy, bronchiolar mucosal hyperplasia, increased luminal inflammatory mucus, airway wall inflammation and scarring, and alveolar wall damage and destruction. Management of COPD involves both pharmacological and nonpharmacological approaches. Bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids are recommended medications for management of COPD especially in more severe disease. Combination therapies containing these medications are now available for the chronic management of stable COPD. The US Food and Drug Administration, recently, approved the combination of budesonide/formoterol (160/4.5 μg; Symbicort™, AstraZeneca, Sweden) delivered via a pressurized meter dose inhaler for maintenance management of stable COPD. The combination also is delivered via dry powder inhaler (Symbicort™ and Turbuhaler™, AstraZeneca, Sweden) but is not approved for use in the United States. In this review, we evaluate available data of the efficacy and safety of this combination in patients with COPD.

Treatment of persistent asthma with Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol inhalation aerosol): an inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist in one pressurized metered-dose inhaler

OBJECTIVE

Budesonide/formoterol inhalation aerosol (Symbicort AstraZeneca, Wilmington, Delaware) is an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonist (LABA) combination administered twice daily via one hydrofluoroalkane pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) approved in the United States for the long-term maintenance treatment of persistent asthma in patients >or=12 years of age whose asthma cannot be controlled by an ICS alone. The objective was to review efficacy, safety, and pharmacogenetic data on budesonide/formoterol pMDI in the treatment of persistent asthma.

METHODS

The authors searched PubMed and respiratory meeting databases to identify asthma studies of budesonide/formoterol pMDI. Studies involving traditional and patient-reported outcomes, safety, tolerability, or pharmacogenetics were included.

RESULTS

In two 12-week pivotal trials in adolescents and adults, treatment with budesonide/formoterol pMDI 160/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (320/9 microg) twice daily for moderate to severe persistent asthma or 80/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (160/9 microg) twice daily for mild to moderate persistent asthma, demonstrated greater efficacy and similar tolerability compared with placebo and the same nominal dose of its monocomponents. Comparisons with formoterol dry powder inhaler (DPI) for predose forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) and with budesonide pMDI for 12-hour mean postdose FEV(1) demonstrated the anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory contributions of budesonide and formoterol, respectively. Evaluations of patient-reported outcomes, including asthma-specific quality of life and treatment satisfaction, further supported the clinical benefits of budesonide/formoterol pMDI. In a 52-week tolerability study of patients aged >or=12 years, budesonide/formoterol pMDI was delivered at up to double the maximum dose (640/18 microg twice daily) and demonstrated a safety profile similar to that of budesonide (640 microg twice daily), with no unexpected pattern of abnormalities. Additional studies reported that budesonide/formoterol pMDI 320/9 microg twice daily and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol DPI 250/50 microg twice daily have similar efficacy and tolerability, with significantly more patients achieving >or=15% improvement in FEV(1) within 15 minutes with budesonide/formoterol pMDI compared with fluticasone/salmeterol DPI. Moreover, inheritance of the Gly16Arg polymorphism of the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor does not appear to affect clinical outcomes with budesonide/formoterol pMDI.

CONCLUSION

Budesonide/formoterol pMDI administered twice daily is effective and generally well tolerated in patients whose asthma is not well controlled on ICS alone.

Budesonide/Formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler

*The corticosteroid budesonide and the long-acting [beta]2-adrenoceptor agonist formoterol have been combined into a single pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) for use in patients aged > or =12 years with asthma. *In well designed 12-week clinical trials in patients with mild to moderate or moderate to severe persistent asthma, lung function improved to a significantly greater extent with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI 160 [micro]g/9 [micro]g or 320 [micro]g/9 [micro]g than with placebo or the same nominal dosage of either of the components alone. *Budesonide/formoterol pMDI was also associated with improvements from baseline in patient-reported asthma control, asthma symptom and asthma-related quality of life outcomes that were significantly greater than those with placebo and, for many endpoints, monotherapy with the individual components. *In a 52-week safety study, treatment with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI 320 [micro]g/9 [micro]g was associated with rapid and durable improvements in lung function and asthma control that were significantly greater than those with twice-daily budesonide pMDI 640 [micro]g monotherapy. *Budesonide/formoterol pMDI was well tolerated in clinical trials. Its overall adverse event profile is consistent with the known tolerability profiles of long-acting [beta]2-adrenoceptor agonist and inhaled corticosteroid therapy, and is similar to that shown with placebo.

Comparison of adjustable- and fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler and fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol dry powder inhaler in asthma patients

BACKGROUND

The adjustable-dose budesonide/formoterol dry powder inhaler (DPI) has demonstrated similar or greater asthma control with less inhaled corticosteroid compared with the fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol DPI.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and resource use of maintenance therapy with the adjustable-dose budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler versus the fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler and the fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol DPI.

METHODS

This was a randomized, open-label, multicenter study of patients (N = 1225) 12 years and older with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma. After 10 to 14 days of current therapy, patients were randomized 2:1 to fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol (160/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations [320/9 microg] twice daily) or fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (250/50 microg x 1 inhalation twice daily) for 1 month (treatment period 1), after which, the fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol group continued therapy and the fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol group was randomized 1:1 to fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol or adjustable-dose budesonide/formoterol (adjustable from 2 inhalations [320/9 microg] twice daily to 2 inhalations [320/9 microg] once daily or 4 inhalations [640/18 microg] twice daily) for 6 months (treatment period 2).

RESULTS

There were no significant between-group differences in asthma exacerbations (primary variable), asthma symptoms, or lung function during the 7-month treatment period. Less study drug (inhalations per day, P < .001) was used with adjustable-dose versus fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol. All treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjustable-dose and fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol showed no differences in asthma control or tolerability versus fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol.