Efficacy and safety of three ciclesonide doses vs placebo in children with asthma: the RAINBOW study

The safety of long-term use of inhaled corticosteroids in patients with asthma: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine the safety of long-term use of ICS in patients with asthma.

METHODS

A systematic search was made of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and clinicaltrials.gov, without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on treatment of asthma with ICS, compared with non-ICS treatment (placebo or other active drugs), were reviewed.

RESULTS

Eighty-six RCTs (enrolling 51,538 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Oral or oropharyngeal candidiasis (RR 2.58, 95% CI 2.00 to 3.33), and dysphonia/hoarseness (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.31 to 1.85) were less frequent in the control group. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of upper respiratory tract infection, lower respiratory tract infection, influenza, decline in bone mineral density, and fractures between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In addition to the mild local adverse events, the long-term use of ICS was safe in patients with asthma.

Review of efficacy of ciclesonide for the treatment of asthma in children

Background: Ciclesonide (CIC) is an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) approved for the maintenance treatment of asthma in patients ages ≥ 12 years. The prodrug aspect of CIC is associated with a safety profile that may make it ideal for children. Objective: The objective was to summarize efficacy results from the eight phase III, randomized, double-blind, controlled trials in children with asthma conducted during CIC clinical development. Methods: Four trials compared CIC 40, 80, or 160 µg/day with placebo. Two trials compared CIC 160 µg/day with fluticasone propionate 200 µg/day, one trial compared CIC 80 or 160 µg/day with fluticasone 200 µg/day, and one trial compared CIC 160 µg/day with budesonide 400 µg/day. Results: The primary end point was met by at least two CIC doses versus placebo in the trials in which the primary end point was the change from baseline in lung function outcome (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV₁] % predicted or morning peak expiratory flow [PEF]). A trial that compared CIC with placebo did not meet the primary end point of superiority in time-to-first severe wheeze exacerbation or lack of improvement. The primary end point of noninferiority to the active control (fluticasone or budesonide) in the change from baseline in a lung function outcome (FEV₁, morning PEF, evening PEF) was met with the CIC 160-µg dose in all active control trials. CIC generally demonstrated statistically significant improvements in forced expiratory flow at 25%-75% of forced vital capacity, asthma symptoms, rescue medication use, and asthma control when compared with placebo and noninferiority for these outcomes compared with fluticasone or budesonide. Conclusion: In children with asthma, once-daily CIC significantly improved large and small airway function, asthma symptoms, and asthma control, and reduced rescue medication use compared with placebo. CIC was comparable with other ICS used to treat asthma in children, which demonstrated its worth for the pediatric population.

Safety of ciclesonide in children with asthma: A review of randomized controlled trials

Background: Parental concerns about the adverse effects of asthma medications can lead to nonadherence and uncontrolled asthma in children. Ciclesonide (CIC) is a prodrug, with low oropharyngeal deposition and bioavailability that may minimize the risk of local and systemic adverse effects. CIC is U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved for asthma in children ages ≥ 12 years. Objective: To summarize safety results from the 13 phase II or III randomized controlled trials conducted in children with asthma during CIC clinical development. Methods: Four 12- to 24-week trials compared the safety of once-daily CIC 40, 80, or 160 µg/day with placebo; four 12-week trials compared the safety of CIC 80 or 160 µg/day with either fluticasone or budesonide; one 12-month trial compared the long-term safety of CIC 40, 80, or 160 µg/day with fluticasone; one 12-month trial compared growth velocity of CIC 40 or 160 µg/day with placebo; and three cross-over trials compared short-term growth velocity and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis effects of CIC 40, 80, or 160 µg/day with placebo or fluticasone. Results: In all, 4399 children were treated with CIC. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) was similar among the CIC doses and between CIC and placebo in short-term studies and between CIC and fluticasone in the long-term safety study. No CIC-related serious AEs were reported in any study. The incidence of treatment-related oral candidiasis was low and similar between CIC (≤0.5%) and placebo (≤0.7%) or active controls (≤0.5%) in the short-term studies. There was no clinically relevant HPA axis suppression or reduction in growth velocity associated with CIC. Conclusion: Data from 13 studies demonstrate that CIC is associated with low rates of oropharyngeal AEs, with no indication of clinically relevant systemic effects in children with asthma. The favorable safety profile and demonstrated improvements in asthma control make CIC an ideal inhaled corticosteroid for the treatment of asthma in children.

Ciclesonide activates glucocorticoid signaling in neonatal rat lung but does not trigger adverse effects in the cortex and cerebellum

Synthetic glucocorticoids (sGCs) such as dexamethasone (DEX), while used to mitigate inflammation and disease progression in premature infants with severe bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), are also associated with significant adverse neurologic effects such as reductions in myelination and abnormalities in neuroanatomical development. Ciclesonide (CIC) is a sGC prodrug approved for asthma treatment that exhibits limited systemic side effects. Carboxylesterases enriched in the lower airways convert CIC to the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) agonist des-CIC. We therefore examined whether CIC would likewise activate GR in neonatal lung but have limited adverse extra-pulmonary effects, particularly in the developing brain. Neonatal rats were administered subcutaneous injections of CIC, DEX or vehicle from postnatal days 1-5 (PND1-PND5). Systemic effects linked to DEX exposure, including reduced body and brain weight, were not observed in CIC treated neonates. Furthermore, CIC did not trigger the long-lasting reduction in myelin basic protein expression in the cerebral cortex nor cerebellar size caused by neonatal DEX exposure. Conversely, DEX and CIC were both effective at inducing the expression of select GR target genes in neonatal lung, including those implicated in lung-protective and anti-inflammatory effects. Thus, CIC is a promising, novel candidate drug to treat or prevent BPD in neonates given its activation of GR in neonatal lung and limited adverse neurodevelopmental effects. Furthermore, since sGCs such as DEX administered to pregnant women in pre-term labor can adversely affect fetal brain development, the neurological-sparing properties of CIC, make it an attractive alternative for DEX to treat pregnant women severely ill with respiratory illness, such as with asthma exacerbations or COVID-19 infections.

A "real-life" study on height in prepubertal asthmatic children receiving inhaled steroids

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is the most common chronic respiratory disease in children and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) constitute the first line of treatment for these patients. However, the potential growth-inhibiting effect of ICS has often been a cause of concern for both caregivers as well as physicians, and there still remains conflict regarding their safety profile.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the administration of ICS in low or medium doses is associated with height reduction in prepubertal children.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study to examine the association between ICS treatment and growth deceleration in children with mild persistent asthma. The comparison of height measurements every 6 months from 3 to 8 years of age was conducted among three groups of patients: patients not receiving ICS, patients being treated with low dose of ICS and patients being treated with medium dose of ICS (GINA Guidelines 2015).

RESULTS

This study included 284 patients (198 male, 86 female) aged 3-8 years; 75 patients were not receiving ICS, 63 patients were on low-dose ICS and 146 patients were on medium-dose ICS. The measured height every 6 months did not differ significantly (p > 0.05) among the three groups while the difference remained stable (p > 0.05), even when we evaluated males and females separately.

CONCLUSIONS

In this "real-life" study we found that long-term treatment with ICS in low or medium doses is not associated with height reduction in prepubertal children with asthma.

Inhaled corticosteroids: Ocular safety and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) effectively deliver corticosteroids to target sites in the lungs and reduce systemic effects compared with oral corticosteroids, but long-term systemic exposure from inhaled corticosteroids remains a concern.

OBJECTIVE

To discuss ICS systemic effects on the eye and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis.

METHODS

Relevant publications were used to augment discussion.

RESULTS

The most common adverse effects of exogenous corticosteroids on the eye are secondary open-angle glaucoma and posterior subcapsular cataracts. Study findings conflict about whether ICS use is associated with increased risk of glaucoma or elevated intraocular pressure, but studies might not have addressed the question in the right population. Increased risk of glaucoma may be limited to a few susceptible individuals, such as individuals with a family history of glaucoma. Large population-based studies reveal that high daily doses or high lifetime exposure of ICSs is associated with a higher risk of posterior subcapsular cataracts. More research is needed to determine the risk from low to moderate doses during long periods. For the HPA axis, there are several measures for detecting systemic effects. Short-term measures are more sensitive for detecting the systemic effects of ICSs but have less predictive value in identifying clinically important adverse effects. Several studies have found that ICSs have a dose-dependent effects on cortisol suppression that can be used to estimate equivalent dosages among ICSs.

CONCLUSION

Because of systemic effects on the HPA axis, high doses of ICS should be avoided where possible. Adult patients undergoing high-dose or long-term ICS therapy should be monitored for cataracts.

Inhaled Corticosteroids and Respiratory Infections in Children With Asthma: A Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are associated with an increased risk of pneumonia in adult patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between ICS use and risk of pneumonia and other respiratory infections in children with asthma.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed from inception until May 2015. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov and databases of pharmaceutical manufacturers.

STUDY SELECTION

We selected randomized trials that compared ICS with placebo for at least 4 weeks in children with asthma.

DATA EXTRACTION

We included 39 trials, of which 31 trials with 11 615 patients contributed data to meta-analyses.

RESULTS

The incidence of pneumonia was 0.58% (44/7465) in the ICS group and 1.51% (63/4150) in the placebo group. The meta-analysis of 9 trials that revealed at least 1 event of pneumonia revealed a reduced risk of pneumonia in patients taking ICS (risk ratio [RR]: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44 to 0.94). Using risk difference as effect measure, the meta-analysis including all 31 trials revealed no significant difference in the risk of pneumonia between the ICS and placebo groups (risk difference: -0.1%; 95% CI: -0.3% to 0.2%). No significant association was found between ICS and risk of pharyngitis (RR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.18), otitis media (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.37), and sinusitis (RR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.05).

LIMITATIONS

Lack of clearly defined criteria for respiratory infections and possible publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Regular use of ICS may not increase the risk of pneumonia or other respiratory infections in children with asthma.

Ciclesonide: A Pro-Soft Drug Approach for Mitigation of Side Effects of Inhaled Corticosteroids

Inhaled corticosteroids are used as one of the first-line drug therapy in patients with asthma. However, their long-term use is associated with various oropharyngeal and systemic side and adverse effects. Design of pro-soft drug is one of the strategies, which was adopted in the design of ciclesonide for mitigation of side effects usually observed with the use of inhaled corticosteroids. Ciclesonide, a pro-soft drug, is converted to an active metabolite desisobutyryl-ciclesonide in the lungs. The anti-inflammatory effect of desisobutyryl-ciclesonide is much higher than ciclesonide, and therefore, the local effect of the metabolite is higher with lower systemic side effects. Ciclesonide has favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties as inhaled corticosteroid including low oral bioavailability, high plasma protein binding and rapid systemic clearance, high pulmonary deposition and distribution and long pulmonary residence duration. These advantageous properties make ciclesonide a very effective treatment option with low side effects. Various clinical studies support safety and efficacy of ciclesonide use in mild, moderate, and severe asthma patients.

Effect of once-daily generic ciclesonide on exhaled nitric oxide in atopic children with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Ciclesonide (CIC) is an effective inhaled corticosteroid for treating asthmatic children. However, its effect on airway inflammation assessed by the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) in children with persistent asthma is virtually unknown. We aimed to assess the effect of once-daily generic CIC, 80 or 160 μg, on FENO, lung function, asthma control and bronchial hyperresponsiveness, in atopic children with persistent asthma.

METHODS

This was a 12-week, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study. Sixty children with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma were recruited. Changes in FENO, asthma control score, lung function (FEV1) and bronchial hyperresponsiveness to methacholine (BHR) were used to assess the effects of both CIC doses. Non-normally distributed variables were log-transformed to approximate normality, and parametric tests were used for comparisons within and between groups at baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

In the CIC 80 μg group, FENO decreased from 45.0 ppb (95% CI 37.8-53.7) to 32.7 ppb (95% CI 21.0-47.3) at the end of study (P=0.021), whereas in the CIC 160 μg group, FENO decreased from 47.3 ppb (95% CI 40.4-55.3) to 30.5 ppb (95% CI 24.1-38.7) (P<0.001). The difference between groups in FENO at the end of study was not significant (P=0.693). There was a significant improvement of asthma control with both CIC doses but there was no significant change in BHR or FEV1 in either group.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily generic ciclesonide (80 μg or 160 μg), for 12 weeks, is effective to improve airway inflammation and asthma control in atopic children with persistent asthma.

Extra-fine particle inhaled corticosteroids, pharma-cokinetics and systemic activity in children with asthma

During recent years, extra-fine particle inhaled corticosteroids with a median aerodynamic diameter ≤2 μm have been introduced in the treatment of asthma. The aim of this paper was to review pharmacokinetics and systemic activity of extra-fine particle hydroalkane pressurized metered dose inhaled (pMDI) ciclesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate in children. A literature review was performed. Systemic bioavailability of oral and pulmonary deposition of extra-fine ciclesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate was 52% and 82%, the half-life in serum 3.2 and 1.5 h and first-pass hepatic metabolism >99% and 60%, respectively. Secondary analyses of urine cortisol/creatinine excretion found no effects of ciclesonide pMDI between 40 and 320 μg/day or of beclomethasone dipropionate pMDI between 80 and 400 μg/day. Ciclesonide pMDI 40, 80 and 160 μg/day caused no effects on short-term lower leg growth rate as assessed by knemometry. Ciclesonide 320 μg/day was associated with a numerically short-term growth suppression equivalent to 30% which was similar to 25% and 36% suppression caused by beclomethasone dipropionate HFA and CFC 200 μg/day, respectively. Consistent with the differences in key pharmacokinetic features, beclomethasone dipropionate is associated with a systemic activity detected by knemometry at a lower dose than ciclesonide. Whether that correlates with a clinically important difference remains to be explored. Assessments of systemic activity of beclomethasone dipropionate <200 μg/day and of ciclesonide >180 μg/day as well as head-to-head comparisons are warranted. Preferably, such studies should apply the sensitive method of knemometry.

Juvenile Toxicology: Relevance and Challenges for Toxicologists and Pathologists

The Society of Toxicologic Pathology (STP) Education Committee and the STP Reproductive Special Interest Group held a North Carolina regional meeting entitled, "Juvenile Toxicology: Relevance and Challenges for Toxicologists and Pathologists" on March 13, 2015, at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences/National Toxicology Program in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The purpose of this regional meeting was to familiarize attendees with the topic of juvenile toxicity testing and discuss its relevance to clinical pediatric medicine, regulatory perspectives, challenges of appropriate study design confronted by toxicologists, and challenges of histopathologic examination and interpretation of juvenile tissues faced by pathologists. The 1-day meeting was a success with over 60 attendees representing industry, government, research organizations, and academia.

[Critical evaluation of inhalation spacer devices available in France]

OBJECTIVE

To identify the spacer devices sold in France and to provide a critical evaluation in the light of the published data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We contacted the pharmaceutical companies, manufacturers and distributors of each spacer in order to obtain their technical parameters and the results of any in vitro or in vivo studies. A review of the literature via PubMed completed the first set of data. We were interested in the quantity of fine particles (less than 5 μm diameter) obtained with a cascade impactor at paediatric flow rates, for all inhaled drugs available in France.

RESULTS

Eleven spacer devices were available in 2013 in France (Ablespacer®, Aerochamber Plus®, Babyhaler®, VHC Arrow®, L'Espace®, Funhaler®, Inhaler®, Itinhaler®, OptiChamber Diamond®, Tipshaler® and Vortex®), but three are no longer manufactured (Babyhaler®, Funhaler® and Inhaler®). All were small volume spacers, sold with facial masks of several different sizes. Four were antistatic (Aerochamber Plus®, Intinhaler®, OptiChamber Diamond® and Vortex®). Only salbutamol was tested with all the devices. Inhaled corticosteroids were tested with some and combinations were studied only with Ablespacer®, Aerochamber Plus®, Itinhaler®, and Vortex®. The results were difficult to interpret because the studies were conducted with very different protocols. The only clinical studies were conducted with Aerochamber Plus®, L'Espace® and Vortex®.

CONCLUSION

There was a great disparity between commercialized spacer devices in terms of the available data describing their in vitro performance.

[Inhaled corticosteroids and growth: should we be worried?]

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are the cornerstone and the first stage of asthma treatment. The objective of this study was to synthesize data on the potential effects of ICSs on growth in children. Studies on the short-term impact of ICSs on growth evaluated by knemometry cannot be extrapolated to the medium or long term and therefore have no utility in real life for a given person. In the medium term, the various ICSs given at the usual doses cause a small reduction in growth after 6 months of treatment. This slowdown occurs at the beginning of treatment, especially in younger children, and the growth velocity corrects itself later but without catching up. In the long term, the prolonged use of ICSs seems to induce a small reduction in the final size in adulthood (close to 1cm) occurring in the first 2 years of treatment without worsening over time. The impact of gender, age at onset of treatment, different ICSs, modes of inhalation, and severity of asthma should also be studied further. The benefit of ICSs in asthma treatment is greater than the risk of side effects, including on growth. The majority of the therapeutic effect is obtained for small to moderate doses of ICSs. Regular adjustment of ICS dose for optimal asthma control should also reduce ICS dose and the impact on growth.

Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: dose-response effects on growth

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the first-line treatment for children with persistent asthma. Their potential for growth suppression remains a matter of concern for parents and physicians.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether increasing the dose of ICS is associated with slower linear growth, weight gain and skeletal maturation in children with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR) and the ClinicalTrials.gov website up to March 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible if they were parallel-group randomised trials evaluating the impact of different doses of the same ICS using the same device in both groups for a minimum of three months in children one to 17 years of age with persistent asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors ascertained methodological quality independently using the Cochrane Risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was linear growth velocity. Secondary outcomes included change over time in growth velocity, height, weight, body mass index and skeletal maturation.

MAIN RESULTS

Among 22 eligible trials, 17 group comparisons were derived from 10 trials (3394 children with mild to moderate asthma), measured growth and contributed data to the meta-analysis. Trials used ICS (beclomethasone, budesonide, ciclesonide, fluticasone or mometasone) as monotherapy or as combination therapy with a long-acting beta2 -agonist and generally compared low (50 to 100 μg) versus low to medium (200 μg) doses of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone equivalent over 12 to 52 weeks. In the four comparisons reporting linear growth over 12 months, a significant group difference was observed, clearly indicating lower growth velocity in the higher ICS dose group of 5.74 cm/y compared with 5.94 cm/y on lower-dose ICS (N = 728 school-aged children; mean difference (MD)0.20 cm/y, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.39; high-quality evidence): No statistically significant heterogeneity was noted between trials contributing data. The ICS molecules (ciclesonide, fluticasone, mometasone) used in these four comparisons did not significantly influence the magnitude of effect (X(2) = 2.19 (2 df), P value 0.33). Subgroup analyses on age, baseline severity of airway obstruction, ICS dose and concomitant use of non-steroidal antiasthmatic drugs were not performed because of similarity across trials or inadequate reporting. A statistically significant group difference was noted in unadjusted change in height from zero to three months (nine comparisons; N = 944 children; MD 0.15, 95% CI -0.28 to -0.02; moderate-quality evidence) in favour of a higher ICS dose. No statistically significant group differences in change in height were observed at other time points, nor were such differences in weight, bone mass index and skeletal maturation reported with low quality of evidence due to imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In prepubescent school-aged children with mild to moderate persistent asthma, a small but statistically significant group difference in growth velocity was observed between low doses of ICS and low to medium doses of HFA-beclomethasone equivalent, favouring the use of low-dose ICS. No apparent difference in the magnitude of effect was associated with three molecules reporting one-year growth velocity, namely, mometasone, ciclesonide and fluticasone. In view of prevailing parents' and physicians' concerns about the growth suppressive effect of ICS, lack of or incomplete reporting of growth velocity in more than 86% (19/22) of eligible paediatric trials, including those using beclomethasone and budesonide, is a matter of concern. All future paediatric trials comparing different doses of ICS with or without placebo should systematically document growth. Findings support use of the minimal effective ICS dose in children with asthma.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Does altering the dose of inhaled corticosteroids make a difference in growth among children with asthma?

BACKGROUND

Asthma guidelines recommend inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as the first choice of treatment for children with persistent asthma that is not well controlled when only a reliever inhaler is used to treat symptoms. Steroids work by reducing inflammation in the lungs and are known to control underlying symptoms of asthma. However, parents and physicians remain concerned about the potential negative effect of ICS on growth.

REVIEW QUESTION

Does altering the dose of inhaled corticosteroids make a difference in the growth of children with asthma? WHAT EVIDENCE DID WE FIND?: We studied whether a difference could be seen in the growth of children with persistent asthma who were using different doses of the same ICS molecule and the same delivery device. We found 22 eligible trials, but only 10 of them measured growth or other measures of interest. Overall, 3394 children included in the review combined 17 group comparisons (i.e. 17 groups of children with mild to moderate asthma using a particular dose and type of steroid in 10 trials). Trials used different ICS molecules (beclomethasone, budesonide, ciclesonide, fluticasone or mometasone) either on their own or in combination with a long-acting beta2 -agonist (a drug used to open up the airways) and generally compared low doses of corticosteroids (50 to 100 μg) with low to medium (200 μg) doses of corticosteroids (converted in μg HFA-beclomethasone equivalent) over 12 to 52 weeks.

RESULTS

We found a small but statistically significant group difference in growth over 12 months between these different doses clearly favouring the lower dose of ICS. The type of corticosteroid among newer molecules (ciclesonide, fluticasone, mometasone) did not seem to influence the impact on growth over one year. Differences in corticosteroid doses did not seem to affect the change in height, the gain in weight, the gain in bone mass index and the maturation of bones. QUALITY OF THE EVIDENCE: This review is based on a small number of trials that reported data and were conducted on children with mild to moderate asthma. Only 10 of 22 studies measured the few outcomes of interest for this review, and only four comparisons reported growth over 12 months. Our confidence in the quality of evidence is high for this outcome, however it is low to moderate for several other outcomes, depending on the number of trials reporting these outcomes. Moreover, a few outcomes were reported only by a single trial; as these findings have not been confirmed by other trials, we downgraded the evidence for these outcomes to low quality. An insufficient number of trials have compared the effect of a larger difference in dose, for example, between a high dose and a low dose of ICS and of other popular molecules such as budesonide and beclomethasone over a year or longer of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We report an evidence-based ICS dose-dependent reduction in growth velocity in prepubescent school-aged children with mild to moderate persistent asthma. The choice of ICS molecule (mometasone, ciclesonide or fluticasone) was not found to affect the level of growth velocity response over a year. The effect of corticosteroids on growth was not consistently reported: among 22 eligible trials, only four comparisons reported the effects of corticosteroids on growth over one year. In view of parents' and clinicians' concerns, lack of or incomplete reporting of growth is a matter of concern given the importance of the topic. We recommend that growth be systematically reported in all trials involving children taking ICS for three months or longer. Until further data comparing low versus high ICS dose and trials of longer duration are available, we recommend that the minimal effective ICS dose be used in all children with asthma.

Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines for asthma recommend inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as first-line therapy for children with persistent asthma. Although ICS treatment is generally considered safe in children, the potential systemic adverse effects related to regular use of these drugs have been and continue to be a matter of concern, especially the effects on linear growth.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of ICS on the linear growth of children with persistent asthma and to explore potential effect modifiers such as characteristics of available treatments (molecule, dose, length of exposure, inhalation device) and of treated children (age, disease severity, compliance with treatment).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), which is derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO; we handsearched respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' clinical trial databases to look for potential relevant unpublished studies. The literature search was conducted in January 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel-group randomised controlled trials comparing daily use of ICS, delivered by any type of inhalation device for at least three months, versus placebo or non-steroidal drugs in children up to 18 years of age with persistent asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias in included studies. We conducted meta-analyses using the Cochrane statistical package RevMan 5.2 and Stata version 11.0. We used the random-effects model for meta-analyses. We used mean differences (MDs) and 95% CIs as the metrics for treatment effects. A negative value for MD indicates that ICS have suppressive effects on linear growth compared with controls. We performed a priori planned subgroup analyses to explore potential effect modifiers, such as ICS molecule, daily dose, inhalation device and age of the treated child.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 trials involving 8471 (5128 ICS-treated and 3343 control) children with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Six molecules (beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, ciclesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone propionate and mometasone furoate) given at low or medium daily doses were used during a period of three months to four to six years. Most trials were blinded and over half of the trials had drop out rates of over 20%. Compared with placebo or non-steroidal drugs, ICS produced a statistically significant reduction in linear growth velocity (14 trials with 5717 participants, MD -0.48 cm/y, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.30, moderate quality evidence) and in the change from baseline in height (15 trials with 3275 participants; MD -0.61 cm/y, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.38, moderate quality evidence) during a one-year treatment period. Subgroup analysis showed a statistically significant group difference between six molecules in the mean reduction of linear growth velocity during one-year treatment (Chi(2) = 26.1, degrees of freedom (df) = 5, P value < 0.0001). The group difference persisted even when analysis was restricted to the trials using doses equivalent to 200 μg/d hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone. Subgroup analyses did not show a statistically significant impact of daily dose (low vs medium), inhalation device or participant age on the magnitude of ICS-induced suppression of linear growth velocity during a one-year treatment period. However, head-to-head comparisons are needed to assess the effects of different drug molecules, dose, inhalation device or patient age. No statistically significant difference in linear growth velocity was found between participants treated with ICS and controls during the second year of treatment (five trials with 3174 participants; MD -0.19 cm/y, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.11, P value 0.22). Of two trials that reported linear growth velocity in the third year of treatment, one trial involving 667 participants showed similar growth velocity between the budesonide and placebo groups (5.34 cm/y vs 5.34 cm/y), and another trial involving 1974 participants showed lower growth velocity in the budesonide group compared with the placebo group (MD -0.33 cm/y, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.14, P value 0.0005). Among four trials reporting data on linear growth after treatment cessation, three did not describe statistically significant catch-up growth in the ICS group two to four months after treatment cessation. One trial showed accelerated linear growth velocity in the fluticasone group at 12 months after treatment cessation, but there remained a statistically significant difference of 0.7 cm in height between the fluticasone and placebo groups at the end of the three-year trial. One trial with follow-up into adulthood showed that participants of prepubertal age treated with budesonide 400 μg/d for a mean duration of 4.3 years had a mean reduction of 1.20 cm (95% CI -1.90 to -0.50) in adult height compared with those treated with placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Regular use of ICS at low or medium daily doses is associated with a mean reduction of 0.48 cm/y in linear growth velocity and a 0.61-cm change from baseline in height during a one-year treatment period in children with mild to moderate persistent asthma. The effect size of ICS on linear growth velocity appears to be associated more strongly with the ICS molecule than with the device or dose (low to medium dose range). ICS-induced growth suppression seems to be maximal during the first year of therapy and less pronounced in subsequent years of treatment. However, additional studies are needed to better characterise the molecule dependency of growth suppression, particularly with newer molecules (mometasone, ciclesonide), to specify the respective role of molecule, daily dose, inhalation device and patient age on the effect size of ICS, and to define the growth suppression effect of ICS treatment over a period of several years in children with persistent asthma.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Do inhaled corticosteroids reduce growth in children with persistent asthma? Review question: We reviewed the evidence on whether inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) could affect growth in children with persistent asthma, that is, a more severe asthma that requires regular use of medications for control of symptoms.

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines for asthma recommend ICS as first-line therapy for children with persistent asthma. Although ICS treatment is generally considered safe in children, parents and physicians always remain concerned about the potential negative effect of ICS on growth. Search date: We searched trials published until January 2014. Study characteristics: We included in this review trials comparing daily use of corticosteroids, delivered by any type of inhalation device for at least three months, versus placebo or non-steroidal drugs in children up to 18 years of age with persistent asthma.

KEY RESULTS

Twenty-five trials involving 8471 children with mild to moderate persistent asthma (5128 treated with ICS and 3343 treated with placebo or non-steroidal drugs) were included in this review. Eighty percent of these trials were conducted in more than two different centres and were called multi-centre studies; five were international multi-centre studies conducted in high-income and low-income countries across Africa, Asia-Pacifica, Europe and the Americas. Sixty-eight percent were financially supported by pharmaceutical companies. Meta-analysis (a statistical technique that combines the results of several studies and provides a high level of evidence) suggests that children treated daily with ICS may grow approximately half a centimeter per year less than those not treated with these medications during the first year of treatment. The magnitude of ICS-related growth reduction may depend on the type of drug. Growth reduction seems to be maximal during the first year of therapy and less pronounced in subsequent years of treatment. Evidence provided by this review allows us to conclude that daily use of ICS can cause a small reduction in height in children up to 18 years of age with persistent asthma; this effect seems minor compared with the known benefit of these medications for asthma control.

QUALITY OF EVIDENCE

Eleven of 25 trials did not report how they guaranteed that participants had an equal chance of receiving ICS or placebo or non-steroidal drugs. All but six trials did not report how researchers were kept unaware of the treatment assignment list. However, this methodological limitation may not significantly affect the quality of evidence because the results remained almost unchanged when we excluded these trials from the analysis.

The effects of inhaled corticosteroids on growth in children

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended as the first-line therapy for children with persistent asthma. These agents are particularly effective in reducing underlying airway inflammation, improving lung function, decreasing airway hyper-reactivity, and reducing intensity of symptoms in asthmatics. Chronic diseases, such as asthma, have growth-suppressing effects independent of the treatment, which inevitably complicates growth studies. One year studies showed a small, dose-dependent effect of most ICS on childhood growth, with some differences across various ICS molecules, and across individual children. Some ICS at the doses studied did not affect childhood growth when rigorous study designs were used. Most studies did not conform completely with the FDA guidance. The data on effects of childhood ICS use on final adult height are conflicting, but one recent well-designed study showed such an effect, clearly warranting additional studies. In spite of these measurable effects of ICS on childhood growth, it is important to understand that the safety profile of all ICS preparations, with focal anti-inflammatory effects on the lung, is significantly better than oral glucocorticoids.

Evaluation of asthma control, parents' quality of life and preference between AeroChamber Plus and AeroChamber Plus Flow-Vu spacers in young children with asthma

OBJECTIVE

The AeroChamber Plus (AC) valved holding chamber has been enhanced to include the Flow-Vu (FV) inspiratory flow indicator that provides visual inhalation feedback during use. We have investigated if FV alters asthma control and whether parents accept it.

METHODS

At visit 1, children with asthma, age 1-5 years, used an AC with their pressurised metered dose inhaler and 2 weeks later (visit 2) they were randomised to use either AC or FV. Subjects returned 6 (visit 3) and 12 (visit 4) weeks later. The Asthma Control (ACQ) and Paediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life (PACQLQ) questionnaires were scored at each visit, and their peak inhalation flow (PIF) when they used their spacer was measured.

RESULTS

Forty participants in each group completed the study. There was no difference in the ACQ scores from visits 2 to 4 between the two groups. The improvements in the PACQLQ scores were greater in the FV group (p = 0.029). The mean difference (95% confidence interval) for the change from visits 2 to 4 between FV and AC groups was 0.05 (-0.33, 0.43) and 0.39 (0.035, 0.737) for the ACQ and PACQLQ, respectively. Most parents preferred the FV (p < 0.001). There was no difference in the PIF rates at each visit and between the two spacers.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no change in asthma control of the young children but that of their parents improved. Parents preferred the FV and this could be related to their improved perception of their children's asthma control by better PACQLQ scores.

Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: dose-response effects on growth

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the first-line treatment for children with persistent asthma. Their potential for growth suppression remains a matter of concern for parents and physicians.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether increasing the dose of ICS is associated with slower linear growth, weight gain and skeletal maturation in children with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR) and the ClinicalTrials.gov website up to March 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were eligible if they were parallel-group randomised trials evaluating the impact of different doses of the same ICS using the same device in both groups for a minimum of three months in children one to 17 years of age with persistent asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors ascertained methodological quality independently using the Cochrane Risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was linear growth velocity. Secondary outcomes included change over time in growth velocity, height, weight, body mass index and skeletal maturation.

MAIN RESULTS

Among 22 eligible trials, 17 group comparisons were derived from 10 trials (3394 children with mild to moderate asthma), measured growth and contributed data to the meta-analysis. Trials used ICS (beclomethasone, budesonide, ciclesonide, fluticasone or mometasone) as monotherapy or as combination therapy with a long-acting beta2-agonist and generally compared low (50 to 100 μg) versus low to medium (200 μg) doses of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone equivalent over 12 to 52 weeks. In the four comparisons reporting linear growth over 12 months, a significant group difference was observed, clearly indicating lower growth velocity in the higher ICS dose group of 5.74 cm/y compared with 5.94 cm/y on lower-dose ICS (N = 728 school-aged children; mean difference (MD)0.20 cm/y, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.39; high-quality evidence): No statistically significant heterogeneity was noted between trials contributing data. The ICS molecules (ciclesonide, fluticasone, mometasone) used in these four comparisons did not significantly influence the magnitude of effect (X(2) = 2.19 (2 df), P value 0.33). Subgroup analyses on age, baseline severity of airway obstruction, ICS dose and concomitant use of non-steroidal antiasthmatic drugs were not performed because of similarity across trials or inadequate reporting. A statistically significant group difference was noted in unadjusted change in height from zero to three months (nine comparisons; N = 944 children; MD 0.15, 95% CI -0.28 to -0.02; moderate-quality evidence) in favour of a higher ICS dose. No statistically significant group differences in change in height were observed at other time points, nor were such differences in weight, bone mass index and skeletal maturation reported with low quality of evidence due to imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In prepubescent school-aged children with mild to moderate persistent asthma, a small but statistically significant group difference in growth velocity was observed between low doses of ICS and low to medium doses of HFA-beclomethasone equivalent, favouring the use of low-dose ICS. No apparent difference in the magnitude of effect was associated with three molecules reporting one-year growth velocity, namely, mometasone, ciclesonide and fluticasone. In view of prevailing parents' and physicians' concerns about the growth suppressive effect of ICS, lack of or incomplete reporting of growth velocity in more than 86% (19/22) of eligible paediatric trials, including those using beclomethasone and budesonide, is a matter of concern. All future paediatric trials comparing different doses of ICS with or without placebo should systematically document growth. Findings support use of the minimal effective ICS dose in children with asthma.

Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines for asthma recommend inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as first-line therapy for children with persistent asthma. Although ICS treatment is generally considered safe in children, the potential systemic adverse effects related to regular use of these drugs have been and continue to be a matter of concern, especially the effects on linear growth.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of ICS on the linear growth of children with persistent asthma and to explore potential effect modifiers such as characteristics of available treatments (molecule, dose, length of exposure, inhalation device) and of treated children (age, disease severity, compliance with treatment).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), which is derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO; we handsearched respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. We also conducted a search of ClinicalTrials.gov and manufacturers' clinical trial databases to look for potential relevant unpublished studies. The literature search was conducted in January 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Parallel-group randomised controlled trials comparing daily use of ICS, delivered by any type of inhalation device for at least three months, versus placebo or non-steroidal drugs in children up to 18 years of age with persistent asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias in included studies. We conducted meta-analyses using the Cochrane statistical package RevMan 5.2 and Stata version 11.0. We used the random-effects model for meta-analyses. We used mean differences (MDs) and 95% CIs as the metrics for treatment effects. A negative value for MD indicates that ICS have suppressive effects on linear growth compared with controls. We performed a priori planned subgroup analyses to explore potential effect modifiers, such as ICS molecule, daily dose, inhalation device and age of the treated child.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 trials involving 8471 (5128 ICS-treated and 3343 control) children with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Six molecules (beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, ciclesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone propionate and mometasone furoate) [corrected] given at low or medium daily doses were used during a period of three months to four to six years. Most trials were blinded and over half of the trials had drop out rates of over 20%.Compared with placebo or non-steroidal drugs, ICS produced a statistically significant reduction in linear growth velocity (14 trials with 5717 participants, MD -0.48 cm/y, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.30, moderate quality evidence) and in the change from baseline in height (15 trials with 3275 participants; MD -0.61 cm/y, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.38, moderate quality evidence) during a one-year treatment period.Subgroup analysis showed a statistically significant group difference between six molecules in the mean reduction of linear growth velocity during one-year treatment (Chi² = 26.1, degrees of freedom (df) = 5, P value < 0.0001). The group difference persisted even when analysis was restricted to the trials using doses equivalent to 200 μg/d hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone. Subgroup analyses did not show a statistically significant impact of daily dose (low vs medium), inhalation device or participant age on the magnitude of ICS-induced suppression of linear growth velocity during a one-year treatment period. However, head-to-head comparisons are needed to assess the effects of different drug molecules, dose, inhalation device or patient age. No statistically significant difference in linear growth velocity was found between participants treated with ICS and controls during the second year of treatment (five trials with 3174 participants; MD -0.19 cm/y, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.11, P value 0.22). Of two trials that reported linear growth velocity in the third year of treatment, one trial involving 667 participants showed similar growth velocity between the budesonide and placebo groups (5.34 cm/y vs 5.34 cm/y), and another trial involving 1974 participants showed lower growth velocity in the budesonide group compared with the placebo group (MD -0.33 cm/y, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.14, P value 0.0005). Among four trials reporting data on linear growth after treatment cessation, three did not describe statistically significant catch-up growth in the ICS group two to four months after treatment cessation. One trial showed accelerated linear growth velocity in the fluticasone group at 12 months after treatment cessation, but there remained a statistically significant difference of 0.7 cm in height between the fluticasone and placebo groups at the end of the three-year trial.One trial with follow-up into adulthood showed that participants of prepubertal age treated with budesonide 400 μg/d for a mean duration of 4.3 years had a mean reduction of 1.20 cm (95% CI -1.90 to -0.50) in adult height compared with those treated with placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Regular use of ICS at low or medium daily doses is associated with a mean reduction of 0.48 cm/y in linear growth velocity and a 0.61-cm change from baseline in height during a one-year treatment period in children with mild to moderate persistent asthma. The effect size of ICS on linear growth velocity appears to be associated more strongly with the ICS molecule than with the device or dose (low to medium dose range). ICS-induced growth suppression seems to be maximal during the first year of therapy and less pronounced in subsequent years of treatment. However, additional studies are needed to better characterise the molecule dependency of growth suppression, particularly with newer molecules (mometasone, ciclesonide), to specify the respective role of molecule, daily dose, inhalation device and patient age on the effect size of ICS, and to define the growth suppression effect of ICS treatment over a period of several years in children with persistent asthma.

From inhaler to lung: clinical implications of the formulations of ciclesonide and other inhaled corticosteroids

Asthma continues to be a global health problem and currently available treatments such as corticosteroids can cause unwanted side effects. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended as first-line therapy for reducing airway inflammation and have a distinct advantage over oral preparations as they provide a direct route of delivery to the lungs. However, local deposition of ICS in the oropharynx can lead to oral candidiasis, dysphonia, and pharyngitis. The pharmaceutical quality is a primary concern of any ICS asthma treatment, with a higher quality product resulting in improved efficacy and safety profiles. The particle size distribution and the spray force velocity of an ICS may directly influence lung deposition, and the spray duration of a device is another important factor when coordinating inhalation. Recent advances in ICS device and formulation technology have resulted in significant improvements in the efficacy of available asthma treatments. In particular, hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) solution technology and the development of smaller particle sizes have resulted in the production of new ICS formulations that have the ability to directly target drug delivery to the site of airway inflammation. Both the ICS formulation and the pressurized metered-dose inhaler device used to administer ciclesonide (CIC) HFA have been developed to treat the underlying chronic inflammation associated with asthma. CIC is administered as a prodrug which is activated in the lungs, leading to minimal oropharyngeal deposition. The small particle size of CIC results in the delivery of a high fraction of respirable particles to the small airways of the lungs, resulting in high lung deposition and continual dose consistency. This review summarizes how CIC administered as an HFA formulation is an effective treatment for asthma.

Ciclesonide versus other inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the cornerstone of asthma maintenance treatment in children. Particularly among parents, there is concern about the safety of ICS as studies in children have shown reduced growth. Small-particle-size ICS targeting the smaller airways have improved lung deposition and effective asthma control might be achieved at lower daily doses.Ciclesonide is a relatively new ICS. This small-particle ICS is a pro-drug that is converted in the airways to an active metabolite and therefore with potentially less local (throat infection) and systemic (reduced growth) side effects. It can be inhaled once daily, thereby possibly improving adherence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of ciclesonide compared to other ICS in the management of chronic asthma in children.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register of trials with pre-defined terms. Additional searches of MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE and Clinical study results.org were undertaken. Searches are up to date to 7 November 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled parallel or cross-over studies were eligible for the review. We included studies comparing ciclesonide with other corticosteroids both at nominally equivalent doses or lower doses of ciclesonide.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Adverse effects information was collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies were included in this review (3256 children, 4 to 17 years of age). Two studies were published as conference abstracts only. Ciclesonide was compared to budesonide and fluticasone.Ciclesonide compared to budesonide (dose ratio 1:2): asthma symptoms and adverse effect were similar in both groups. Pooled results showed no significant difference in children who experience an exacerbation (risk ratio (RR) 2.20, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75 to 6.43). Both studies reported that 24-hour urine cortisol levels showed a statistically significant decrease in the budesonide group compared to the ciclesonide group.Ciclesonide compared to fluticasone (dose ratio 1:1): no significant differences were found for the outcome asthma symptoms. Pooled results showed no significant differences in number of patients with exacerbations (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58 to 3.21) and data from a study that could not be pooled in the meta-analysis reported similar numbers of patients with exacerbations in both groups. None of the studies found a difference in adverse effects. No significant difference was found for 24-hour urine cortisol levels between the groups (mean difference 0.54 nmol/mmol, 95% CI -5.92 to 7.00).Ciclesonide versus fluticasone (dose ratio 1:2) was assessed in one study and showed similar results between the two corticosteroids for asthma symptoms. The number of children with exacerbations was significantly higher in the ciclesonide group (RR 3.57, 95% CI 1.35 to 9.47). No significant differences were found in adverse effects (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.14) and 24-hour urine cortisol levels (mean difference 1.15 nmol/mmol, 95% CI 0.07 to 2.23).The quality of evidence was judged 'low' for the outcomes asthma symptoms and adverse events and 'very low' for the outcome exacerbations for ciclesonide versus budesonide (dose ratio 1:1). The quality of evidence was graded 'moderate' for the outcome asthma symptoms, 'very low' for the outcome exacerbations and 'low' for the outcome adverse events for ciclesonide versus fluticasone (dose ratio 1:1). For ciclesonide versus fluticasone (dose ratio 1:2) the quality was rated 'low' for the outcome asthma symptoms and 'very low' for exacerbations and adverse events (dose ratio 1:2).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

An improvement in asthma symptoms, exacerbations and side effects of ciclesonide versus budesonide and fluticasone could be neither demonstrated nor refuted and the trade-off between benefits and harms of using ciclesonide instead of budesonide or fluticasone is unclear. The resource use or costs of different ICS should therefore also be considered in final decision making. Longer-term superiority trials are needed to identify the usefulness and safety of ciclesonide compared to other ICS. Additionally these studies should be powered for patient relevant outcomes (exacerbations, asthma symptoms, quality of life and side effects). There is a need for studies comparing ciclesonide once daily with other ICS twice daily to assess the advantages of ciclesonide being a pro-drug that can be administered once daily with possibly increased adherence leading to increased control of asthma and fewer side effects.

Recent research on inhaled corticosteroids and growth

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Description of recent studies evaluating growth and inhaled corticosteroids.

RECENT FINDINGS

Corticosteroids are the gold standard of asthma maintenance treatment, but effects on growth remain controversial. This is a review of recent research in this area, which has focused on medications causing less adrenal suppression as well as alternative regimens for chronic illness such as asthma.

SUMMARY

The use of newer corticosteroids and regimens shows short-term evidence of minimal growth effects without worsening of asthma control.

Development of a validated patient-reported symptom metric for pediatric eosinophilic esophagitis: qualitative methods

Background

Previous attempts to measure symptoms in pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) have not fully included patients and parents in the item development process. We sought to identify and validate key patient self-reported and parent proxy-reported outcomes (PROs) specific to EoE.

Methods

We developed methodology for focus and cognitive interviews based on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines for PROs, the validated generic PedsQL™ guidelines, and the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ). Both child (ages 8-12 and 13-18) and parent-proxy (ages 2-4, 5-7, 8-12, and 13-18) interviews were conducted.

Results

We conducted 75 interviews to construct the new instrument. Items were identified and developed from individual focus interviews, followed by cognitive interviews for face and content validation. Initial domains of symptom frequency and severity were developed, and open-ended questions were used to generate specific items during the focus interviews. Once developed, the instrument construct, instructions, timeframe, scoring, and specific items were systematically reviewed with a separate group of patients and their parents during the cognitive interviews.

Conclusions

To capture the full impact of pediatric EoE, both histologic findings and PROs need to be included as equally important outcome measures. We have developed the face and content validated Pediatric Eosinophilic Esophagitis Symptom Score (PEESS™ v2.0). The PEESS™ v2.0 metric is now undergoing multisite national field testing as the next iterative instrument development phase.

Ciclesonide in wheezy preschool children with a positive asthma predictive index or atopy

BACKGROUND

Few large-scale studies have examined inhaled corticosteroid treatment in preschool children with recurrent wheeze. We assessed the effects of ciclesonide in preschool children with recurrent wheeze.

METHODS

We included children 2-6 yrs with recurrent wheeze and a positive asthma predictive index or aeroallergen sensitization to, excluding patients with episodic viral wheezing. After a 2-4-week baseline period, patients with ongoing symptoms or rescue medication use were randomised to once-daily ciclesonide 40, 80, 160 μg or placebo for 24 weeks.

RESULTS

The number of wheeze exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids was unexpectedly low in all groups: 25 (10.2%) in placebo group, as compared to 11 (4.4%), 18 (7.3%), and 17 (6.7%) in ciclesonide 40, 80, and 160 μg, respectively. The difference in time to first exacerbation was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.786), but the difference in exacerbation rates between placebo and the pooled ciclesonide groups was (p = 0.03). Large and significant (p < 0.0001) improvements in symptom scores and rescue medication use occurred in all groups, including placebo. Improvements in FEV(1) and FEF(25-75) (measured in 284 4-6 yr olds) were larger in the ciclesonide than in the placebo group. No differences in safety parameters (adverse events, height growth, serum and urinary cortisol levels) between ciclesonide and placebo were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In preschool children with recurrent wheeze and a positive asthma predictive index, ciclesonide modestly reduces wheeze exacerbation rates and improves lung function. A large placebo response and unexpected selection of patients with mild disease may have affected outcomes, highlighting the heterogeneity of preschool wheezing disorders.