Effects of fluticasone propionate, triamcinolone acetonide, prednisone, and placebo on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis

Oral steroid-sparing effect of high-dose inhaled corticosteroids in asthma

BACKGROUND

The proportion of the efficacy of high-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma that is due to systemic effects is uncertain. This study aimed to estimate the ICS dose-response relationship for oral corticosteroid-sparing effects in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma, and to determine the proportion of oral corticosteroid-sparing effects due to their systemic effects, based on the comparative dose-response relationship of ICS versus oral corticosteroids on adrenal suppression.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials reporting oral corticosteroid-sparing effects of high-dose ICS in oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma. In addition, reports of oral corticosteroid to ICS dose-equivalence in terms of adrenal suppression were retrieved. The primary outcome was the proportion of the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of ICS that could be attributed to systemic absorption, per 1000 µg increase of ICS, expressed as a ratio. This ratio estimates the oral corticosteroid sparing effect of ICS due to systemic effects.

RESULTS

11 studies including 1283 participants reporting oral corticosteroid-sparing effects of ICS were identified. The prednisone dose decrease per 1000 µg increase in ICS varied from 2.1 mg to 4.9 mg, depending on the type of ICS. The ratio of the prednisone-sparing effect due to the systemic effects per 1000 µg of fluticasone propionate was 1.02 (95% CI 0.68-2.08) and for budesonide was 0.93 (95% CI 0.63-1.89).

CONCLUSION

In patients with oral corticosteroid-dependent asthma, the limited available evidence suggests that the majority of the oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of high-dose ICS is likely to be due to systemic effects.

A Review of Systemic Corticosteroid Use in Pregnancy and the Risk of Select Pregnancy and Birth Outcomes

The evidence to date regarding corticosteroid exposure in pregnancy and select pregnancy and birth outcomes is limited and inconsistent. The authors provide a narrative review of published literature summarizing the findings for oral clefts, preterm birth, birth weight, preeclampsia, and gestational diabetes mellitus. Whenever possible, the results are limited to oral or systemic administration with a further focus on use in autoimmune disease. Although previous studies of corticosteroid exposure in pregnancy reported an increased risk of oral clefts in the offspring, more recent studies have not replicated these findings.

Adrenal Insufficiency in Corticosteroids Use: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to estimate pooled percentages of patients with adrenal insufficiency after treatment with corticosteroids for various conditions in a meta-analysis. Secondly, we aimed to stratify the results by route of administration, disease, treatment dose, and duration.

METHODS

We searched seven electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and CINAHL/Academic Search Premier) in February 2014 to identify potentially relevant studies. Original articles testing adult corticosteroid users for adrenal insufficiency were eligible.

RESULTS

We included 74 articles with a total of 3753 participants. Stratified by administration form, percentages of patients with adrenal insufficiency ranged from 4.2% for nasal administration (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-28.9) to 52.2% for intra-articular administration (95% CI, 40.5-63.6). Stratified by disease, percentages ranged from 6.8% for asthma with inhalation corticosteroids only (95% CI, 3.8-12.0) to 60.0% for hematological malignancies (95% CI, 38.0-78.6). The risk also varied according to dose from 2.4% (95% CI, 0.6-9.3) (low dose) to 21.5% (95% CI, 12.0-35.5) (high dose), and according to treatment duration from 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3-7.4) (<28 d) to 27.4% (95% CI, 17.7-39.8) (>1 year) in asthma patients.

CONCLUSIONS

1) Adrenal insufficiency after discontinuation of glucocorticoid occurs frequently; 2) there is no administration form, dosing, treatment duration, or underlying disease for which adrenal insufficiency can be excluded with certainty, although higher dose and longer use give the highest risk; 3) the threshold to test corticosteroid users for adrenal insufficiency should be low in clinical practice, especially for those patients with nonspecific symptoms after cessation.

Impact of study design on the evaluation of inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids' effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function

In part I of this review, an overview of the designs of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis studies in the setting of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or intranasal corticosteroids (INS) use was discussed. Part II provides detailed discussion on the HPA axis evaluation results for each common ICS and INS, and how these results are possibly affected by the factors of study design. Significant adrenal suppression at conventional ICS/INS doses appears to be rare in clinical settings. The magnitude of cortisol suppression varies widely among different study designs. Factors potentially impacting this variability include: the choice of dose, dosing duration, assay sensitivity, statistical methodology, study population, and compliance. All of these factors have the potential to affect the extent of HPA axis effects detected and should be considered when designing or interpreting the results of a HPA axis study.

Impact of study design on the evaluation of inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids' effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function, part I: general overview of HPA axis study design

Inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids (ICS and INS) are among the mainstays of the treatment for asthma and allergic rhinitis, respectively, and also carry the potential to suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. Several important factors affect the interpretability of trials investigating the impact of ICS and INS on the HPA axis. This paper reviews 106 published clinical trials, peer-reviewed articles, and New Drug Application reviews of approved ICS and INS, using MEDLINE and Drugs@FDA database. The trials included in this review evaluated the potential impact on HPA axis function of eight approved single-ingredient ICS and INS (beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, ciclesonide, flunisolide, fluticasone furoate, flucticasone propionate, mometasone furoate, and triamcinolone acetonide) and combination products containing these ingredients. The most commonly utilized design was blinded, placebo controlled, and short term (<6 weeks) for adult trials and blinded, placebo controlled, and long term (≥6 weeks) for pediatric trials. Factors potentially affecting trial results include the choice of dose, dosing duration, assay sensitivity, statistical methodology, and the study population evaluated (patients or healthy volunteers). All of these factors have the potential to affect the level of adrenal suppression detected. In conclusion, to be informative, a HPA axis study should be well designed and carefully implemented to minimize variability in results and improve the overall interpretability of data obtained.

Fluticasone versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) is a relatively new inhaled corticosteroid for the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To assess efficacy and safety outcomes in studies that compared FP to placebo for treatment of chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (January 2008), reference lists of articles, contacted trialists and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997-2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing FP to placebo in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and risk of bias.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data. Quantitative analyses were undertaken using Review Manager software.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, recruiting 16,160 participants. In non-oral steroid treated asthmatics with mild and moderate disease FP resulted in improvements from baseline compared with placebo across all dose ranges (100 to 1000 mcg/d) in FEV1 (between 0.1 to 0.43 litres); morning PEF (between 23 and 46 L/min); symptom scores (based on a standardised scale, between 0.44 and 0.7); reduction in rescue beta-2 agonist use (between 1 and 1.4 puffs/day). High dose FP increased the number of patients who could withdraw from prednisolone: FP 1000-1500 mcg/day Peto Odds Ratio 14.07 (95% CI 7.17 to 27.57). FP at all doses led to a greater likelihood of sore throat, hoarseness and oral Candidiasis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Doses of FP in the range 100-1000 mcg/day are effective. In most patients with mild-moderate asthma improvements with low dose FP are only a little less than those associated with high doses when compared with placebo. High dose FP appears to have worthwhile oral-corticosteroid reducing properties. FP use is accompanied by an increased likelihood of oropharyngeal side effects.

Fluticasone at different doses for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) is a high-potency inhaled corticosteroid used in the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the efficacy and safety outcomes of inhaled fluticasone at different nominal daily doses in the treatment of chronic asthma.2. To test for the presence of a dose-response effect.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register (January 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing fluticasone at different nominal daily doses in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author extracted data. These were checked and verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative analyses where undertaken using Review Manager.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-one published and unpublished trials (representing 55 group comparisons, 10,797 participants) met the inclusion criteria. In asthmatics with mild to moderate disease who were not on oral steroids, FP did not exhibit a dose-response effect in the lower dose comparisons in FEV1 (50mcg, 100mcg, 200mcg and 4-500mcg daily). There were no statisitically significant differences between 4-500mcg and 800-1000mcg, and between 50-100 and 800-1000mcg of FP. When 200mcg was compared with 800-1000mcg daily FEV1 favoured the four/five fold increase. For PEF, a dose response was present with FP when low and moderate, and low and high doses of FP were compared. There was no evidence of a dose-response effect on symptoms or rescue beta-2 agonist use. The likelihood of hoarseness and oral candidiasis was significantly greater for the higher doses (800 to 1000 microg/day). People with oral steroid-dependent asthma treated with FP (2000 microg/day) were significantly more likely to reduce oral prednisolone than those on 1000 to 1500 microg/day (Peto odds Ratio 2.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 6.3). The highest dose also allowed a significant reduction in daily oral prednisolone dose compared to 1000 to 1500 microg/day (WMD 2.0 mg/day, 95% CI 0.1 to 4.0 mg/day).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence of a pronounced dose response in FEV1 with increasing doses of fluticasone. The number of studies contributing to our primary outcomes was low. At dose ratios of 1:2, there are statistically significant differences in favour of the higher dose in morning peak flow across the low dose range. The clinical impact of these differences is open to interpretation. Patients with moderate disease achieve similar levels of asthma control on medium doses of fluticasone (400 to 500 microg/day) as they do on high doses (800 to 1000 microg/day). More work in severe asthma would help to confirm that doses of FP above 500 microg/day confer greater benefit in this subgroup than doses of around 200 microg/day. In oral corticosteroid-dependent asthmatics, reductions in prednisolone requirement may be gained with FP 2000 microg/day.

Impact of inhaled corticosteroids on cortisol suppression in adults with asthma: a quantitative review

BACKGROUND

Studies examining the effects of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) on cortisol suppression show inconsistent results, and there is uncertainty regarding the dose-response relationship between ICSs and cortisol suppression.

OBJECTIVE

To determine, using meta-analysis, the extent of cortisol suppression after administration of clinically relevant ICS doses in adults with asthma.

METHODS

Database searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library) using appropriate indexed terms were performed to identify eligible articles for review. Articles reporting the effects of ICSs on cortisol levels in asthmatic adults, measured using the cumulative serum or plasma cortisol, morning serum or plasma cortisol, or cumulative overnight urinary free cortisol method, were identified. All available cortisol measurements were extracted. Cortisol suppression was estimated, and treatment arms were grouped into low-, medium-, and high-dose ranges according to the Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines. A multivariate model was used to determine relationships between ICS dose and cortisol suppression and to explore sources of heterogeneity among trials.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies providing information on 216 measures of cortisol suppression were included in this meta-analysis. Cortisol suppression in the low-, medium-, and high-dose groups were estimated to be 17.92% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.08%-24.77%), 26.55% (95% CI, 17.29%-35.80%), and 36.31% (95% CI, 26.48%-46.13%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Statistically significant cortisol suppression was evident at low doses of ICSs and increased with dose. These results support an impact of all ICSs on endogenous cortisol levels and underscore the importance of titrating ICS doses to the minimum required to maintain symptom control.

Evidence-based selection of inhaled corticosteroid for treatment of chronic asthma

Published literature relevant to comparison of various inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) was reviewed. Marked heterogeneity was found in the reported results. The efficacy and side effects of ICSs depend on their formulation, dosing and device used, and the subjects' age, severity of asthma, and inhaler technique. All these factors have not been included uniformly in most study designs. Notwithstanding this limitation, it appears that fluticasone is generally very effective and safe in low-to-medium doses and may be used for most patients. Budesonide is the only Pregnancy Category B ICSs, all others being Category C, and it is available as nebulizer suspension suitable for use in children over 6 months of age. Budesonide, also available as dry powder inhaler, and beclomethasone, available as metered-dose inhaler, are equal in efficacy, and side effects and may be chosen according to the patient's ability to handle the device. Flunisolide causes fewer side effects but is also relatively less effective. Triamcinolone is generally less effective and causes more side effects than most of the other ICSs. Mometasone may be preferred if once-daily dosing is desired. Ciclesonide has been found highly effective in once-daily dose and without side effects even in high doses. Further studies comparing it with other ICSs over longer periods of use will determine its place in treatment of chronic asthma.

Fluticasone versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) is a relatively new inhaled corticosteroid for the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess efficacy and safety outcomes in studies that compared FP to placebo for treatment of chronic asthma.2. To explore the presence of a dose-response effect.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (January 2005), reference lists of articles, contacted trialists and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997-2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing FP to placebo in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted data. Quantitative analyses were undertaken using RevMan 4.2

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-five studies met the inclusion criteria (14,208 participants). Methodological quality was high. In non-oral steroid treated asthmatics with mild and moderate disease FP resulted in improvements from baseline compared with placebo across all dose ranges (100 to 1000 mcg/d) in FEV1 (between 0.13 to 0.45 litres); morning PEF (between 23 and 47 L/min); symptom scores (based on a standardised scale, between 0.5 and 0.85); reduction in rescue beta-2 agonist use (between 1.2 and 2.2 puffs/day). High dose FP increased the number of patients who could withdraw from prednisolone: FP 1000-1500 mcg/day Peto Odds Ratio 14.07 (95% CI 7.17 to 27.57). FP at all doses led to a greater likelihood of sore throat, hoarseness and oral Candidiasis. Twenty-one patients would need to be treated for one extra to develop Candidiasis (FP 500 mcg/day), whilst only three or four patients need to be treated to avoid one extra patient being withdrawn due to lack of efficacy at all doses of FP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Doses of FP in the range 100-1000 mcg/day are effective. In most patients with mild-moderate asthma improvements with low dose FP are only a little less than those associated with high doses when compared with placebo. High dose FP appears to have worthwhile oral-corticosteroid reducing properties. FP use is accompanied by an increased likelihood of oropharyngeal side effects.

Inhaled fluticasone at different doses for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) is a high-potency inhaled corticosteroid used in the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the efficacy and safety outcomes of inhaled fluticasone at different nominal daily doses in the treatment of chronic asthma. 2. To test for the presence of a dose-response effect.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register (January 2005) and reference lists of articles. We contacted trialists and pharmaceutical companies for additional studies and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997 to 2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing fluticasone at different nominal daily doses in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer extracted data. These were checked and verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative analyses where undertaken using RevMan (Analyses 1.0.2).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-three studies (45 data sets with 8913 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was high. In asthmatics with mild to moderate disease who were not on oral steroids a dose-response effect was present with FP for change in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). For low doses (100 versus 200 microg/day) the weighted mean difference (WMD) was 6.29 litres/min, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.28 to 10.29. Comparing medium (400 to 500 microg/day) to low dose (200 microg/day) FP the WMD was 6.46 litres/min (95% CI 3.02 to 9.89); this effect was more pronounced in one trial with more severely asthmatic children. For FP 100 versus 400 to 500 microg/day the WMD was 8 litres/min (95% CI 1 to 15) and at high versus low doses (800 to 1000 versus 50 to 100 microg/d) the WMD was 22 litres/min (95% CI 15 to 29). When high and medium doses were compared there was no significant difference in the change in morning PEF: at 400 to 500 versus 800 to 1000 microg/day the WMD was 0.16 litres/min (95% CI 6.95 to 6.63). There was no dose-response effect on symptoms or rescue beta-2 agonist use. The likelihood of hoarseness and oral candidiasis was significantly greater for the higher doses (800 to 1000 microg/day). People with oral steroid-dependent asthma treated with FP (2000 microg/day) were significantly more likely to reduce oral prednisolone than those on 1000 to 1500 microg/day (Peto odds Ratio 2.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 6.3). The highest dose also allowed a significant reduction in daily oral prednisolone dose compared to 1000 to 1500 microg/day (WMD 2.0 mg/day, 95% CI 0.1 to 4.0 mg/day).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Effects of fluticasone are dose dependent but relatively small. At dose ratios of 1:2, there are significant differences in favour of the higher dose in morning peak flow across the low dose range. The clinical impact of these differences is open to interpretation. Patients with moderate disease achieve similar levels of asthma control on medium doses of fluticasone (400 to 500 microg/day) as they do on high doses (800 to 1000 microg/day). More work in severe asthma would help to confirm that doses of FP above 500 microg/day confer greater benefit in this subgroup than doses of around 200 microg/day. In oral corticosteroid-dependent asthmatics, reductions in prednisolone requirement may be gained with FP 2000 microg/day.

Decreased cortisol response to insulin induced hypoglycaemia in asthmatics treated with inhaled fluticasone propionate

AIMS

To assess adrenal function in asthmatic children treated with inhaled fluticasone propionate for up to 16 weeks.

METHODS

Children with asthma and bronchial hyperresponsiveness to inhaled methacholine were treated with inhaled fluticasone 250-750 microg/day via Volumatic spacer. The insulin tolerance test (ITT) was performed to assess adrenal function.

RESULTS

Eighteen asthmatic patients (10 boys, 8 girls), aged 7-17 years received inhaled fluticasone therapy at a median dose of 477 microg/m2 per day for 5-16 weeks. Adrenal suppression, defined as 60 minute serum cortisol less than 500 nmol/l, was found in 9 of 18 children. Following the ITT, the median basal and 60 minute serum cortisol concentrations of the suppressed group were 135.0 and 350.0 nmol/l, respectively; the corresponding values for the unsuppressed group were 242.2 and 564.7 nmol/l. Repeat ITT in the suppressed group 2-3 months after discontinuation of fluticasone revealed that all patients had a 60 minute serum cortisol greater than 500 nmol/l.

CONCLUSION

After therapy for asthma with inhaled fluticasone at approximately 500 microg daily for up to 16 weeks, half the children had evidence of adrenal suppression.

The effect of a steroid "burst" and long-term, inhaled fluticasone propionate on adrenal reserve

BACKGROUND

Although widely used, the effects of steroid "bursts" on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, especially with long-term, concomitant topical steroids use, have not been studied.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of a prednisone burst, long-term intranasal steroids, and inhaled fluticasone propionate on the suppression and recovery of adrenal function.

METHODS

Adult patients taking long-term intranasal steroids, either moderate-dose (440 microg/d) or high-dose (880 microg/d) inhaled fluticasone propionate, underwent a low-dose cosyntropin stimulation test (LDCST) before and 2 days after a prednisone burst. Suppressed adrenal responses were monitored with a weekly LDCST. Persistent abnormal LDCST results were confirmed by 8-hour cosyntropin infusion. Inhaled fluticasone dosages were decreased; adrenal recovery was evaluated by a monthly LDCST. Adverse effects of steroids were monitored by questionnaires.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients participated in the study. Three of 31 patients not taking inhaled steroids and 1 of 13 patients taking moderate-dose fluticasone had abnormal LDCST results on day 2 after the prednisone burst, which normalized by the second week. In the high-dose fluticasone group, 14 of 19 patients had suppressed LDCST responses on day 2 and adrenal function recovered in 10 of 19 patients by the fourth week. These patients complained significantly of decreased libido (P = 0.02), listlessness (P = 0.03), and weight loss (P = 0.05). High-dose fluticasone (r = 0.66, P < 0.001) and duration of use (r = 0.32, P = 0.01) were statistically correlated with adrenal impairment. Of the 4 patients with persistent adrenal impairment, 3 patients successfully reduced dosages of inhaled fluticasone and adrenal function recovered in 2 to 10 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Prednisone bursts induce brief adrenal impairment. Intranasal steroids and moderate-dose fluticasone had no effect on adrenal function. High-dose, inhaled fluticasone caused mild-to-significant adrenal suppression and delayed the recovery after a steroid burst. Avoiding or limiting the duration of high-dose inhaled steroids would minimize systemic adverse effects.

A comparison of short-term treatment with inhaled fluticasone propionate and zafirlukast for patients with persistent asthma

PURPOSE

To compare the short-term efficacy and safety of low-dose fluticasone propionate with that of oral zafirlukast therapy for patients previously treated with beta-2-agonists alone, and to evaluate the potential therapeutic benefit of switching from zafirlukast to a low-dose inhaled corticosteroid.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This study consisted of a 4-week randomized, double-blind treatment period followed by a 4-week open-label period. Two hundred ninety-four patients > or =12 years old with asthma previously uncontrolled with beta-2-agonists alone were randomly assigned to treatment with low-dose inhaled fluticasone (88 microg twice daily) or oral zafirlukast (20 mg twice daily). After 4 weeks, all patients discontinued their double-blind therapy and received open-label fluticasone (88 microg twice daily). Outcomes included pulmonary function, asthma symptoms, albuterol use, asthma exacerbations, and adverse events.

RESULTS

During the double-blind treatment period, fluticasone patients had significantly greater improvements in morning peak flow (29.3 L/min vs. 18.3 L/min), percentage of symptom-free days (19.8% vs. 11.6%), and daily albuterol use (-1.8 puffs per day vs. -1.1 puffs per day) compared with zafirlukast patients (P < or =0.025, each comparison). During the open-label treatment period, patients switched from zafirlukast to fluticasone experienced additional improvements in morning peak flow (17.2 L/min), evening peak flow (13.6 L/min), and FEV(1) (0.11 liter) and daily albuterol use (-0.9 puffs daily) compared with values obtained at the end of the double-blind treatment period (P < or =0.001, each comparison).

CONCLUSION

Low-dose fluticasone was more effective than zafirlukast in improving pulmonary function and symptoms in patients with persistent asthma. In addition, switching patients from zafirlukast to fluticasone further improved clinical outcomes.

Inhaled mometasone furoate reduces oral prednisone requirements while improving respiratory function and health-related quality of life in patients with severe persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroid therapy in severe persistent asthma has been shown to reduce or eliminate oral corticosteroid (OCS) use while retaining effective asthma control.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the ability of mometasone furoate (MF) delivered by means of dry powder inhaler to reduce daily oral prednisone requirements in OCS-dependent patients with severe persistent asthma.

METHODS

We performed a 12-week, double-blind, placebocontrolled trial (21 centers, 132 patients) comparing 2 doses of MF (400 and 800 microg administered twice daily) with placebo, followed by a 9-month open-label phase in which 128 patients received treatment with MF.

RESULTS

At the endpoint of the double-blind trial, MF 400 and 800 mg twice daily reduced daily OCS requirements by 46.0% and 23.9%, respectively, whereas placebo increased OCS requirements by 164.4% (P <.01). Oral steroids were eliminated in 40%, 37%, and 0% of patients in the MF 400 and 800 mg twice daily and placebo groups, respectively. Pulmonary function and quality of life significantly increased for MF-treated patients. Further reductions in OCS requirements were achieved with long-term MF treatment in the open-label phase.

CONCLUSION

MF inhaled orally as a dry powder is an effective alternative to systemic corticosteroids in patients with severe persistent asthma.

Fluticasone propionate versus zafirlukast: effect in patients previously receiving inhaled corticosteroid therapy

BACKGROUND

The use of inhaled corticosteroids compared with leukotriene modifying drugs in the treatment of persistent asthma has not been extensively studied.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of a low dose of fluticasone propionate (FP) and zafirlukast in patients previously maintained on inhaled corticosteroids.

METHODS

Patients (> or = 12 years old; FEV1 = 60% to 85% of predicted) with persistent asthma who were previously treated with low doses of triamcinolone acetonide (TAA) 400 to 800 microg/day or beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) 168 to 336 microg/day were randomized to treatment with FP aerosol 88 microg BID (FP, n = 221) or zafirlukast 20 mg BID (n = 216) over 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Treatment with FP significantly increased the mean change at endpoint (the last post-baseline observation) in FEV1 (0.22 L versus 0.03 L, P < .001), morning PEF (17.8 versus 3.1 L/min, P = .004), evening PEF (16.7 versus 2.6 L/min, P = .002), the percentage of symptom-free days (16.2 versus 7.1%, P = .007), and the percentage of rescue-free days (23.4 versus 9.3%, P < .001), and significantly decreased rescue albuterol use (-0.66 puffs/day versus an increase of 0.27 puffs/day, P < .001) and combined symptom scores (-0.13 versus an increase of 0.08, P < .001) compared with zafirlukast. Treatment with FP maintained the percentage of awakening-free nights (-1.0 +/- 1.0); in contrast, treatment with zafirlukast reduced the percentage of awakening-free nights (-9.0 +/- 1.6, P < .001). A clinically meaningful difference (change of > or = 0.5; P < .001) was observed between FP and zafirlukast in the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) global score and for each domain score except activity limitation (change of 0.3, P < .001). Significantly more patients in the zafirlukast group experienced an asthma exacerbation (n = 14) compared with FP-treated patients (n = 5, P = .035). Patients in the zafirlukast group were significantly more likely to be withdrawn due to lack of efficacy (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Switching patients from low doses of inhaled corticosteroids to a lower total microgram dose of FP improves pulmonary function, asthma symptoms, and quality of life, while switching to the leukotriene receptor antagonist zafirlukast may result in worsening of asthma control. This was indicated by the significant number of zafirlukast-treated patients who were dropped from the study due to lack of efficacy within 6 weeks of discontinuing inhaled corticosteroids.

Salmeterol and fluticasone propionate combined in a new powder inhalation device for the treatment of asthma: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Many patients with persistent asthma need both long-acting bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids for optimal asthma control.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to compare the efficacy and safety of salmeterol 50 microg combined with fluticasone 100 microg (in a combination dry powder product) with that of placebo, fluticasone, or salmeterol alone.

METHODS

A 12-week randomized, double-blind, multicenter study was conducted in 356 patients aged 12 years or older with asthma. After a 14-day screening period, patients were randomized to treatment with salmeterol 50 microg combined with fluticasone 100 microg (combination product), salmeterol 50 microg, fluticasone 100 microg, or placebo administered in the Diskus dry powder inhaler (GlaxoWellcome, UK) twice daily.

RESULTS

Mean change in FEV(1) at end point was significantly (P < or =.003) greater with the combination product (0.51 L) compared with placebo (0.01 L), salmeterol (0.11 L), and fluticasone (0.28 L). The combination product significantly increased (P < or =.013) area under the curve compared with placebo and fluticasone on day 1 and compared with placebo, salmeterol, and fluticasone at week 1 and week 12. Patients in the combination product group were less likely to withdraw from the study because of worsening asthma compared with those in the other groups (P < or =.020). The combination product significantly increased (P < or =.012) morning PEF (combination, 52.5 L/min; placebo, -23.7 L/min; salmeterol, -1.7 L/min; fluticasone, 17.3 L/min) and evening PEF at end point compared with the other groups. The combination product significantly (P < or =.025) reduced symptom scores and albuterol use compared with the other treatments and increased the percentage of nights with no awakenings and the percentage of days with no symptoms compared with placebo and salmeterol. All treatments were equally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Salmeterol 50 microg and fluticasone 100 microg combined in the Diskus powder delivery device offers significant clinical advantages over salmeterol or fluticasone alone at the same doses.

Low-dose inhaled fluticasone propionate versus oral zafirlukast in the treatment of persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared the efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids and leukotriene modifiers for the treatment of persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE

Our purpose was to compare the efficacy of a low dose of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) with that of oral zafirlukast in the treatment of persistent asthma previously treated with short-acting beta(2)-agonists alone.

METHODS

A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter study was conducted in 451 patients aged 12 years and older with asthma who were symptomatic on short-acting beta(2)-agonists alone. After an 8- to 14-day run-in period, patients were randomized to treatment with FP 88 microg twice daily or zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily.

RESULTS

Treatment with FP was more effective than treatment with zafirlukast in increasing morning FEV(1) (by 0.42 L vs 0.20 L over baseline, P <.001), morning peak expiratory flow (by 49.94 L/min vs 11.68 L/min over baseline, P <. 001), and evening PEF (by 38.91 L/min vs 10.50 L/min over baseline, P <.001). Statistically significant differences between the two treatments in FEV(1) were noted after the first observation (week 4) and in morning and evening peak expiratory flow by week 2. Mean change in percentage of symptom-free days was greater with FP than with zafirlukast (28.5% of days vs 15.6% of days, P <.001) and FP significantly increased the percentage of rescue-free days by 40.4% of days compared with 24.2% of days with zafirlukast (P <.001). Treatment with FP significantly reduced albuterol use by 2.39 puffs per day compared with 1.45 puffs per day (P <.001) and increased the percentage of nights with no awakenings by 21.2% of nights compared with 8.0% of nights with zafirlukast (P <.001).

CONCLUSION

The clinical effectiveness of a low dose of FP as first-line therapy in patients with persistent asthma who are symptomatic on beta(2)-agonists alone is superior to that of zafirlukast.

Combined salmeterol 50 microg and fluticasone propionate 250 microg in the diskus device for the treatment of asthma

Three hundred forty-nine patients with asthma previously treated with medium doses of inhaled corticosteroids during a 2-wk, single-blind, run-in period were randomized to treatment with salmeterol 50 microg combined with fluticasone propionate (FP) 250 microg, salmeterol 50 microg, FP 250 microg, or placebo, each given twice daily through a Diskus device for 12 wk. Mean change in FEV(1) at endpoint was significantly (p </= 0.001) greater with the salmeterol/FP combination product (0.48 L) than with placebo (-0.11 L), salmeterol (0.05 L), or FP (0.25 L). The combination product significantly increased the area under the 12-h serial FEV(1) curve relative to baseline over that with placebo, salmeterol, or FP at Day 1, Week 1, and Week 12 (p </= 0.025). Patients in the combination-product group had a significantly greater probability of remaining in the study without being withdrawn because of worsening asthma than did patients in the placebo, salmeterol, or FP groups (p </= 0.002). The combination product significantly increased (p < 0. 001) morning PEF at endpoint (53.5 L/min) as compared with placebo (-14 L/min), salmeterol (-11.6 L/min), or FP (15.2 L/min). The combination product significantly (p </= 0.011) reduced asthma symptom scores and supplemental albuterol use, and significantly increased the percentage of nights with no awakenings as compared with placebo, salmeterol, and FP (p </= 0.016). Combination treatment with salmeterol 50 microg and FP 250 microg given twice daily from the Diskus device provided better asthma control and greater improvement in pulmonary function than did the individual agents, and may simplify the management of asthma in patients who need both classes of drugs for optimal control of their disease.

Fluticasone alone or in combination with salmeterol vs triamcinolone in asthma

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacies of medium-dose fluticasone propionate (FP), medium-dose triamcinolone acetonide (TAA), and combined low-dose FP plus salmeterol (SL).

DESIGN

Randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy, multicenter, 12-week clinical trial.

SETTING

Allergy/respiratory care clinics.

PATIENTS

Six hundred eighty patients with asthma previously uncontrolled with low-dose inhaled corticosteroids.

INTERVENTIONS

FP, 220 microg bid; TAA, 600 microg bid; or FP, 88 microg plus SL, 42 microg bid.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Outcome measures included FEV1, peak expiratory flow (PEF), supplemental albuterol use, nighttime awakenings, asthma symptoms, and physician global assessment. Compared with TAA, 600 microg bid, treatment with FP 220, microg bid, significantly increased FEV1, morning and evening PEF, and percent symptom-free days, and significantly reduced rescue albuterol use, number of nighttime awakenings, and overall asthma symptom scores (p < or = 0.035). Improvements with low-dose FP, 88 microg, plus SL, 42 microg bid, were significantly (p < or = 0.004) greater than TAA, 600 microg bid, in all the aforementioned efficacy measures as well as percent of rescue-free days. Combined low-dose FP, 88 microg, plus SL, 42 microg bid, also significantly increased FEV1 and percent of rescue-free days, and significantly reduced albuterol use compared with medium-dose FP, 220 microg bid (p < or = 0.018). At endpoint, both FP, 220 microg bid, and FP, 88 microg, plus SL, 42 microg bid, significantly increased FEV1 by 0.48 L and 0.58 L, respectively, compared with 0.34 L with TAA, 600 microg bid.

CONCLUSION

In patients who are symptomatic while taking low-dose inhaled corticosteroids, medium-dose FP (440 microg/d) and combination treatment with low-dose FP (176 microg/d) plus SL (84 microg/d) are both more effective than medium-dose TAA (1200 microg/d) in improving pulmonary function and asthma symptom control.