Fluticasone propionate powder: oral corticosteroid-sparing effect and improved lung function and quality of life in patients with severe chronic asthma

Expert Consensus on the Tapering of Oral Corticosteroids for the Treatment of Asthma. A Delphi Study

Rationale: There is a need to minimize oral corticosteroid (OCS) use in patients with asthma to prevent their costly and burdensome adverse effects. Current guidelines do not provide recommendations for OCS tapering in patients with asthma.Objectives: To develop expert consensus on OCS tapering among international experts.Methods: A modified Delphi method was used to develop expert consensus statements relating to OCS use, tapering, adverse effects, adrenal insufficiency, and patient-physician shared decision-making. Initial statements proposed by experts were categorized, filtered for repetition, and presented back to experts over three ranking rounds to obtain consensus (≥70% agreement).Measurements and Main Results: One hundred thirty-one international experts participated in the study, and 296 statements were ranked. Numerous recommendations and guidance regarding appropriate OCS use were established. Experts agreed that OCS tapering should be attempted in all patients with asthma receiving maintenance OCS therapy, with personalization of tapering rhythm and speed. The importance of recognizing individual adverse effects was also established; however, a unified approach to the assessment of adrenal insufficiency was not reached. Shared decision-making was considered an important goal during the tapering process.Conclusions: In this Delphi study, expert consensus statements were generated on OCS use, tapering, adverse-effect screening, and shared decision-making, which may be used to inform clinical practice. Areas of nonconsensus were identified, highlighting uncertainty among the experts around some aspects of OCS use in asthma, such as adrenal insufficiency, which underscores the need for further research in these domains.

Inhaled Corticosteroid Therapy in Adult Asthma. Time for a New Therapeutic Dose Terminology

The Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines use the traditional terminology of "low," "medium," and "high" doses of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) to define daily maintenance doses of 100 to 250 μg, >250 to 500 μg, and >500 μg, respectively, of fluticasone propionate or equivalent for adults with asthma. This concise clinical review proposes that this terminology is not evidence based and that prescribing practice based on this terminology may lead to the use of inappropriately excessive doses of ICS. Specifically, the ICS dose that achieves 80-90% of the maximum obtainable benefit is currently classified as a low dose, with the description of two higher dose levels of medium and high, which are associated with significant risk of systemic adverse effects. Asthma guidelines and clinician prescribing practice need to be modified in accordance with the currently available evidence of the dose-response relationship of ICS in adult asthma. We propose a reclassification of ICS doses based on a "standard daily dose," which is defined as 200-250 μg of fluticasone propionate or equivalent, representing the dose at which approximately 80-90% of the maximum achievable therapeutic benefit of ICS is obtained in adult asthma across the spectrum of severity. It is recommended that ICS treatment be started at these standard doses, which then represent the doses at which maintenance ICS are prescribed at step 2 and within ICS/long-acting β-agonist combination therapy at step 3. The opportunity is available to prescribe higher doses within ICS/long-acting β-agonist maintenance therapy in accordance with the stepwise approach to asthma treatment at step 4.

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.

The Asthma Controller Step-down Yardstick

Asthma guidelines recommend a control-based approach to disease management in which the assessment of impairment and risk is linked to step-based therapy. Using this model, controller treatment is adjusted-upward or downward-according to a patient's level of asthma control over time. Strategies for stepping up controller therapy are well described, and the adult and pediatric Asthma Yardsticks provide operational recommendations based on patient profiles. Strategies for stepping down controller treatment are less clear, although stepping down to the minimum effective therapy is important and should be considered when a patient's asthma has been well controlled for an adequate period as defined by risk and impairment. This Yardstick presents recommendations for when and how to step down asthma controller therapy according to guideline-defined control levels. The objective is to provide clinicians who treat patients with asthma with a practical and clinically relevant framework for implementing a step-down in controller therapy.

Small-airway disease in asthma: pharmacological considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the pharmacological considerations and rationale for treating small-airway disease in asthma via the inhaled and systemic route, and to also directly address the comparison between small vs. large aerosol particles in the management of asthmatic patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Airway inflammation in patients with asthma is predominantly present within the small airways and this region is the main contributor to airflow limitation. Assessing small-airway dysfunction has advanced in the last decade, allowing us to compare this region in disease to health and also in response to treatment. Recent pharmaceutical developments have led to inhaler devices with smaller aerosols and systemic biologic treatments, enabling therapeutic drug delivery to the distal lung regions. The question therefore is does targeting the small airways directly translate into health benefits for asthmatic patients with respect to an improvement in their disease control and quality of life?

SUMMARY

Studies now show that treating the peripheral airways with smaller drug particle aerosols certainly achieve comparable efficacy (and some studies show superiority) compared with large particles, a reduction in the daily inhaled corticosteroid dose, and greater asthma control and quality of life in real-life studies. Hence, the small airways should not be neglected when choosing the optimal asthma therapy.

Assessing the risks and benefits of step-down asthma care: a case-based approach

Guidelines have called for pharmacologic stepped care to improve asthma treatment. Therapeutic options which have been approved provide physicians and their patients alternatives for stepping up asthma treatment to achieve control. However, few studies have been performed to identify and characterize procedures for optimal stepping-down treatment in patients with asthma. The resulting uncertainty as well as a lack of prioritization for asthma reassessment once control has been maintained has led to a lack of well-defined procedures for stepping down asthma treatment. However, recent studies provide guidance regarding the risks of stepping down asthma medications. This review uses case-based examples to demonstrate how health care providers may engage patients in discussions regarding guideline recommendations to promote individualized asthma care.

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.

Small airways dysfunction in asthma: evaluation and management to improve asthma control

The small airways have been neglected for many years, but interest in the topic has been rekindled with recent advances in measurement techniques to assess this region and also the ability to deliver therapeutics to the distal airways. Current levels of disease control in asthmatic patients remain poor and there are several contributory factors including; poor treatment compliance, heterogeneity of asthma phenotypes and associated comorbidities. However, the proposition that we may not be targeting all the inflammation that is present throughout the whole respiratory tree may also be an important factor. Indeed decades ago, pathologists and physiologists clearly identified the importance of small airways dysfunction in asthmatic patients. With improved inhaler technology to deliver drug to target the whole respiratory tree and more sensitive measures to assess the distal airways, we should certainly give greater consideration to treating the small airway region when seeing our asthmatic patients in clinic. The aim of this review is to address the relevance of small airways dysfunction in the daily clinical management of patients with asthma. In particular the role of small particle aerosols in the management of patients with asthma will be explored.

Development, characterisation and pharmacoscintigraphic evaluation of nano-fluticasone propionate dry powder inhalation as potential antidote against inhaled toxic gases

Acute lung injuries caused due to inhalation of toxic irritant gases such as ammonia, chlorine, hot smoke and burning plastic fumes predominantly affect the airways, causing tracheitis, bronchitis, and other inflammatory responses. The purpose was to develop and characterise nanoparticle based fluticasone propionate (FP) DPI formulation and assess its in vitro and in vivo pulmonary deposition using pharmacoscintigraphy. FP nanoparticles were prepared by nanoprecipitation method. Optimisation was carried out with the help of Box-Behnken statistical design. Nanoparticles were characterised with the help of SEM, FT-IR, DSC and XRD. Anderson cascade impaction showed that nano-FP exhibited significantly higher respirable fraction of 60.3 ± 2.41 as compared to 16.4 ± 0.66 for micronised form. Ventilation lung scintigraphy in human volunteers confirmed significant increase in drug delivery till alveolar region with nano-FP in comparison to micronised drug. Results indicate that the developed formulation may have a potential prophylactic/therapeutic role against toxic, irritant gas inhalation.

Treating the small airways

The final article in this series evaluates the approaches undertaken to treating the small-airway region of the lungs and the clinical implications of inhaled therapy targeting the periphery in patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Efficacy and onset of action of mometasone furoate/formoterol and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination treatment in subjects with persistent asthma

Background

Mometasone furoate/formoterol (MF/F) is a novel combination therapy for treatment of persistent asthma. This noninferiority trial compared the effects of MF/F and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/S) combination therapies on pulmonary function and onset of action in subjects with persistent asthma.

Methods

Following a 2- to 4-week run-in period with MF administered via a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) 200 μg (delivered as 2 inhalations of MF-MDI 100 μg) twice daily (BID), subjects (aged ≥12 y) were randomized to MF/F-MDI 200/10 μg BID (delivered as 2 inhalations of MF/F-MDI 100/5 μg) or FP/S administered via a dry powder inhaler (DPI) 250/50 μg (delivered as 1 inhalation) BID for 12 weeks. The primary assessment was change from baseline to week 12 in area under the curve for forced expiratory volume in 1 second measured serially for 0-12 hours postdose (FEV₁ AUC_{0-12 h}). Secondary assessments included onset of action (change from baseline in FEV₁ at 5 minutes postdose on day 1) and patient-reported outcomes.

Results

722 subjects were randomized to MF/F-MDI (n = 371) or FP/S-DPI (n = 351). Mean FEV₁ AUC_{0-12 h} change from baseline at week 12 for MF/F-MDI and FP/S-DPI was 3.43 and 3.24 L × h, respectively (95% CI, -0.40 to 0.76). MF/F-MDI was associated with a 200-mL mean increase from baseline in FEV₁ at 5 minutes postdose on day 1, which was significantly larger than the 90-mL increase for FP/S-DPI (P < 0.001). The overall incidence of adverse events during the 12-week treatment period that were considered related to study therapy was similar in both groups (MF/F-MDI, 7.8% [n = 29]; FP/S-DPI, 8.3% [n = 29]).

Conclusions

The results of this 12-week study indicated that MF/F improves pulmonary function and asthma control similar to FP/S with a superior onset of action compared with FP/S. Both drugs were safe, improved asthma control, and demonstrated similar results for other secondary study endpoints.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00424008

Optimal management of severe/refractory asthma

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease of the airways, affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Asthma results in airway hyperresponsiveness, leading to paroxysmal symptoms of wheeze, cough, shortness of breath, and chest tightness. When these symptoms remain uncontrolled, despite treatment with high doses of inhaled and ingested corticosteroids, asthmatic patients are predisposed to greater morbidity and require more health care support. Treating patients with severe asthma can be difficult and often poses a challenge to physicians when providing ongoing management. This clinical review aims to discuss the definition, prevalence and evaluation of severe asthmatics, and provides a review of the existing pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment options.

[Diagnosis and treatment guidelines for difficult-to-control asthma in children]

Children suffering from difficult-to-control asthma (DCA) require frequent appointments with their physician, complex treatment regimes and often admissions to hospital. Less than 5% of the asthmatic population suffer this condition. DCA must be correctly characterised to rule out false causes of DCA and requires making a differential diagnosis from pathologies that mimic asthma, comorbidity, environmental and psychological factors, and analysing the factors to determine poor treatment compliance. In true DCA cases, inflammation studies (exhaled nitric oxide, induced sputum, broncho-alveolar lavage and bronchial biopsy), pulmonary function and other clinical aspects can classify DCA into different phenotypes which could make therapeutic decision-making easier.

Inhaled mometasone furoate improves health-related quality of life in patients with persistent asthma

Results from two clinical trials of mometasone furoate administered via a dry powder inhaler (MF-DPI) were reviewed to evaluate the consistency of effects of MF-DPI administered once-daily in the evening (QD PM) or twice-daily (BID) on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in adults with persistent asthma previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids. HRQOL data were collected from two 12-week, randomized, double-blind trials: in study 1 (n = 268), patients received MF-DPI 400 microg QD PM (1 inhalation), MF-DPI 200 microg BID, or placebo; in study 2 (n = 400), patients received MF-DPI 200 microg QD PM, MF-DPI 400 microg QD PM (1 inhalation), MF-DPI 200 microg BID, MF-DPI 400 microg QD PM (2 inhalations of 200 microg), or placebo. In both studies, HRQOL was assessed using the Medical Outcomes Survey 36-item Short Form (SF-36) and an asthma-specific module. MF-DPI was associated with consistent, statistically significant improvements in asthma-specific total scores, breathlessness, asthma concerns, and physical symptoms compared with placebo in both trials (p < 0.05 vs. placebo). MF-DPI improved SF-36 Physical Component Summary scores at all doses except 200 microg QD PM. In conclusion, the results from two placebo-controlled trials suggest that MF-DPI 400 microg/d, administered once or twice-daily, produces consistent, statistically, and clinically significant improvement in HRQOL measures in patients with persistent 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

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.

Relative oral corticosteroid-sparing effect of 7 inhaled corticosteroids in chronic asthma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy of various inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) for oral corticosteroid (OCS)-sparing effect in asthma is not known. To our knowledge, no randomized controlled trial directly comparing 2 ICSs has been reported, but several randomized controlled trials have reported comparison of various ICSs with placebo.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an adjusted indirect comparison of 7 ICSs for their OCS-sparing effect.

METHODS

PubMed and bibliographies of relevant articles. Eighteen placebo-controlled randomized trials of 7 ICSs were analyzed using a random-effect model. Pooled benefit ratios (BRs) (ICS/placebo) for elimination of OCS and weighted mean differences (ICS - placebo) for OCS dose change by each ICS vs placebo were determined. Pairwise adjusted indirect comparisons of various ICSs were then made.

RESULTS

For OCS elimination, all ICSs were more effective than placebo (BR: mometasone, 17.2; budesonide, 8.2; beclomethasone and fluticasone, 5.4; triamcinolone, 4.6; ciclesonide, 2.8; and flunisolide, 2.2). On pairwise adjusted indirect comparison, the BR of mometasone was significantly higher than that of triamcinolone (P = .02), ciclesonide (P = .01), and flunisolide (P = .01) and that of budesonide was significantly higher than that of ciclesonide (P = .02) and flunisolide (P = .03). For OCS dose change, beclomethasone achieved a significantly lower final mean OCS dose than fluticasone or flunisolide (P < .001). In all other comparisons, the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

All ICSs studied were significantly more effective than placebo for OCS sparing, but mometasone seemed to be more effective than others. However, because of very few trials for some ICSs, more placebo-controlled trials for adjusted indirect comparison or randomized trials for direct comparison of these ICSs are needed for definitive conclusions.

Impact of inhaled corticosteroid-induced oropharyngeal adverse events: results from a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Oropharyngeal adverse events associated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use can affect adherence; however, these effects have been studied less extensively than those that occur systemically.

OBJECTIVE

To calculate the risk of ICS-induced oral candidiasis, dysphonia, and pharyngitis among currently available therapies and to determine related effects of dose and device.

METHODS

A computerized search in MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2004) and EMBASE (January 1974 to June 2004) was conducted using indexed MedDRA terms for oropharyngeal adverse events. Odds ratios (ORs) were used to determine the rate of ICS-induced adverse events based on dose and device.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies (59 drug arms) were evaluated. Incidence of oral candidiasis (P < or = .001), dysphonia (P < or = .001), and pharyngitis (P < or = .023) increased significantly with dose vs placebo at all dose levels and combined, regardless of device. Overall, the ICS metered-dose inhaler (MDI) device (hydrofluoroalkane formulation, 4 arms; chlorofluorocarbon formulation, 26 arms) was associated with a 5-fold greater risk of oral candidiasis vs MDI placebo (OR, 5.40). In contrast, the ICS dry-powder inhaler (DPI) device had a 3-fold greater risk for oral candidiasis vs DPI placebo (OR, 3.24). A similar trend was observed with regard to dysphonia (ICS MDI: OR, 5.68; ICS DPI: OR, 3.74; both vs. placebo). Both ICS MDI and DPI were associated with an approximately 2-fold greater risk of pharyngitis compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently available inhaled corticosteroids canbe associated with oropharyngeal adverse events. Such events may be reduced by postdose mouth rinsing or use of a spacer.

The efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate delivered via a dry powder inhaler for the treatment of asthma

Inhaled corticosteroids are the gold standard of daily therapy for effective control of all stages of persistent asthma. For this review of the new inhaled corticosteroid mometasone furoate, a MEDLINE/PubMed search using the terms "mometasone furoate AND asthma" found 57 articles, 17 of which presented data from efficacy and safety studies reviewed herein. In clinical trials, once-daily evening dosing of mometasone furoate delivered via dry powder inhaler (200 or 400 mu g/day) was effective in patients with mild to moderate asthma previously treated with short-acting beta2-agonists alone and in those previously maintained on inhaled corticosteroid therapy. In patients with severe asthma, mometasone furoate 400 mu g twice daily eliminated or reduced the need for oral prednisone while improving lung function, asthma symptoms, and quality of life. Clinical studies have shown that mometasone furoate is generally well tolerated and has minimal systemic activity at recommended doses. In conclusion, mometasone furoate provides primary care and specialty physicians with a safe, effective, and convenient option to meet the challenges of asthma management.

Potency ratio fluticasone propionate (Flixotide Diskus)/budesonide (Pulmicort Turbuhaler)

In the choice of, or switch between, various inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) it is important to know equipotent doses for clinical treatment effects of the alternatives. Various ICS do have different inherent potency. Further, the ICS are delivered from inhalers that may differ markedly in output characteristics and drug delivery to intrapulmonary airways. Therefore, clinical efficacy comparisons must include drug-inhaler comparisons. We estimated the therapeutic potency ratio of the Flixotide Diskus (fluticasone propionate, FP) and the Pulmicort Turbuhaler (budesonide, BUD) in steroid-naive asthma patients, using a dose-reduction technique (FP 500-0 mcg/day, BUD 800-0 mcg/day). The dose defining end point was loss of asthma control in this paper denoted as exacerbation. In total, 282 patients with proven asthma were enrolled in the study, and 103 in the FP group and 98 in the BUD group completed the study per protocol. In total, 80 patients in the FP-group and 79 in the BUD-group experienced a dose defining exacerbation. The exacerbation frequency increased in a dose-dependent way as the dose was titrated down. From these data the potency difference between the present drug inhaler combinations, Flixotide Diskus and Pulmicort Turbuhaler, was calculated to be between 1.50:1 (95% CI 1.10:1-2.05:1) and 1.75:1 (CI 1.26:1-2.43:1) depending on if patients with insufficient steroid-response were excluded from the calculations or not. In these steroid-naïve patients, the potency difference was evident only at low daily doses, below 200 mcg.

Cost-effectiveness of current and optimal treatment for adult asthma

BACKGROUND

This article is part of a project to determine the cost-effectiveness of averting the burden of disease. We used population data to investigate the costs and benefits of allocating resources to optimal treatment for asthma in adults, using a burden of disease framework.

METHODS

We calculated the population burden of asthma in the absence of any treatment as years lived with disability (YLD), ignoring the years of life lost. We then estimated the proportion of burden averted with current interventions, the proportion that could be averted with optimally implemented current evidence-based guidelines and the direct treatment cost-effectiveness ratio in dollarA per YLD averted for both current and optimal treatment.

RESULTS

The direct treatment cost of current treatment of adult asthma in Australia was dollar A452 million and averted 25% of the burden with a cost-effectiveness ratio of dollar A14 000/YLD averted. Optimal treatment and optimal compliance would cost dollar A627 million and avert 69% of the burden with a cost-effectiveness ratio of dollar A7000/YLD averted.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of optimal treatment for asthma is affordable, will be more cost-effective and will significantly decrease disability.

Inhaled mometasone furoate reduces oral prednisone usage and improves lung function in severe persistent asthma

OBJECTIVE

The reduction of oral prednisone use by mometasone furoate (MF) delivered by HFA-227 metered dose inhaler (MDI) was examined in oral corticosteroid (OCS)-dependent patients with severe persistent asthma.

METHODS

A 3-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (n=123), followed by a 9-month open-label phase (n=120). The study was conducted at 26 medical centers in the United States. Patients were randomized to treatment with MF-MDI 400 or 800 microg twice-daily (bid) doses, or placebo in the double-blind trial. All patients received MF in the open-label phase.

RESULTS

At the endpoint of the double-blind trial, MF-MDI 400 and 800 microg bid reduced the daily OCS dose by 39.4% and 31.1%, respectively, while placebo increased the OCS dose by 107.2% (P<0.01). The OCS requirement was reduced by 50% or more in 63% and 60% of patients treated with MF-MDI 400 and 800 microg bid, respectively, compared with 14% of patients receiving placebo. After 12 weeks, despite prednisone reductions, pulmonary function, asthma symptoms, albuterol use, nocturnal awakenings, and physician-evaluated response to therapy also showed significant improvement with MF-MDI treatment compared with placebo. Further reductions in OCS requirements were achieved with long-term MF-MDI treatment in the open-label phase, with an overall 67% reduction in prednisone usage and 51% of patients completely eliminating prednisone usage by the 1-year time point.

CONCLUSION

MF delivered by HFA-227 MDI significantly reduces daily OCS use compared with placebo and facilitates elimination of OCS use in patients with severe persistent asthma.

Management of 13 cases of canine respiratory disease using inhaled corticosteroids

OBJECTIVES

To determine the value of inhaled corticosteroids in the management of chronic inflammatory airway disease in dogs.

METHODS

Medical records of dogs that were presented for the investigation of respiratory disease were reviewed retrospectively. Criteria for inclusion were knowledge of previous medical treatment including side effects, diagnosis of the underlying disease, use of inhaled corticosteroids and at least two-months follow-up data.

RESULTS

Thirteen dogs that fulfilled the criteria were identified. Ten dogs were diagnosed with chronic bronchitis and three with eosinophilic bronchopneumopathy. Four dogs had not previously received corticosteroid treatment for their respiratory disease, and all these showed a reduction or a resolution of clinical signs without obvious side effects after inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Nine dogs had previously received oral or parenteral corticosteroids for treatment of their respiratory disease, and all had exhibited side effects. Five of these dogs were treated with inhaled corticosteroids alone, and all exhibited an improvement in clinical signs without observable side effects. The remaining four dogs were treated with a combination of inhaled and oral corticosteroids, and all showed improvement in clinical signs and reduction in side effects. Inhaled medication was well tolerated in all dogs.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Inhaled corticosteroids were used for the management of chronic bronchitis and eosinophilic bronchopneumopathy in 13 dogs, and these may have the advantage of reducing side effects associated with oral corticosteroids.

The dose-response characteristics of inhaled corticosteroids when used to treat asthma: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews

Inhaled corticosteroids form the cornerstone of treatment for most patients with asthma. A range of compounds are available with a wide range of prescribable doses. In this overview, we summarize the findings from a number of Cochrane systematic reviews that have examined the relative benefits of different doses of beclometasone dipropionate, budesonide and fluticasone propionate when used to treat children and adults. The key findings are that all inhaled corticosteroids demonstrate a dose-response relationship for efficacy measures, but most of the benefit in mild-to-moderate severity disease is gained in the low-to-moderate dose range of each drug. In this group, high doses of fluticasone lead to small improvements in measures of control at the expense of a steep increase in the incidence of oral side-effects. In patients with severe disease who are dependent on oral steroids, there may be appreciable benefit in reducing oral steroids from very high compared with high doses of fluticasone.

Ciclesonide reduces the need for oral steroid use in adult patients with severe, persistent asthma

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Oral corticosteroids (OCS) may be associated with systemic adverse events (AEs), which can be reduced by replacing OCS with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The potential of ciclesonide, a novel ICS, to reduce OCS use in patients with severe, persistent asthma was evaluated in this study.

DESIGN

A phase III, 12-week, international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study.

PATIENTS

Adult and adolescent patients (> or = 12 years old; n = 141) with severe, persistent, oral steroid (prednisone)-dependent asthma.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to receive ciclesonide (640 mug/d or 1,280 microg/d [ex-actuator]) bid or placebo for 12 weeks. Weekly evaluations determined eligibility for prednisone dose reduction based on predetermined criteria.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

The prednisone dose was significantly reduced by 47% and 63% in the groups receiving ciclesonide, 640 microg/d, and ciclesonide, 1,280 microg/d, respectively, vs an increase of 4% in the placebo group (both p < or = 0.0003) at week 12. By week 12, prednisone was discontinued by approximately 30% of patients in the ciclesonide-treated groups, vs 11% of patients in the placebo group (both p < or = 0.04). FEV1 improved significantly at week 12 in the ciclesonide treatment groups vs placebo (p < 0.03). The occurrence of local and systemic AEs was comparable between all treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Study results suggest that ciclesonide significantly reduces the need for OCS in patients with severe, persistent asthma, while maintaining asthma control.

Asthma and athletes: therapy to compete

Asthma presents special challenges to both the athletes who have it and to their health care providers. This article briefly reviews the problem of asthma--especially exercise-induced asthma--in the competitive athlete, and then describes treatments that are effective in controlling asthma. Drug-doping regulations are explained, as is the worldwide impact of drug doping on competitive athletes who have asthma. This review concludes with recommendations for competitive athletes and their health care providers regarding how to deal with asthma in this patient population.

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.

Moderate dose inhaled corticosteroids plus salmeterol versus higher doses of inhaled corticosteroids in symptomatic asthma

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty as to the dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at which to start concomitant long acting beta agonist (LABA) treatment in patients with asthma not adequately controlled by ICS alone.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was carried out of randomised, double blind clinical trials that compared the efficacy of adding salmeterol to moderate doses of ICS (fluticasone propionate 200 mug/day or equivalent) with increasing the ICS dose by at least twofold in symptomatic adult patients with asthma. The main outcome measures were the number of subjects withdrawn from the study due to asthma and the number of subjects with at least one moderate or severe exacerbation.

RESULTS

Twelve studies with a total of 4576 subjects met the inclusion criteria for the analyses. The number of subjects withdrawn due to asthma and with at least one moderate or severe exacerbation was higher in the high dose ICS group (odds ratios 1.58, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.24 and 1.35, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.66, respectively). For the secondary outcome variables (forced expiratory volume in 1 second, morning and evening peak expiratory flow, and daytime beta agonist use) there was significantly greater benefit in the salmeterol group.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis shows that the addition of salmeterol to moderate doses of ICS (fluticasone 200 mug/day or equivalent) in patients with asthma symptomatic at that dose results in significantly greater clinical benefit than increasing the dose of ICS by twofold or more.

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.

Asthma and therapeutics: inhaled corticosteroids, corticosteroid osteoporosis, and the risk of fracture in chronic asthma

Current guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis do not address the risks to bone density and the likelihood of fracture that may be associated with inhaled corticosteroid treatment for asthma. This review outlines an approach to the use of bone densitometry in clinical practice for the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of osteoporosis in asthmatic patients receiving inhaled corticosteroid therapy.

Device Selection and Outcomes of Aerosol Therapy: Evidence-Based Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The proliferation of inhaler devices has resulted in a confusing number of choices for clinicians who are selecting a delivery device for aerosol therapy. There are advantages and disadvantages associated with each device category. Evidence-based guidelines for the selection of the appropriate aerosol delivery device in specific clinical settings are needed.

AIM

(1) To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of treatment using nebulizers vs pressurized metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) with or without a spacer/holding chamber vs dry powder inhalers (DPIs) as delivery systems for beta-agonists, anticholinergic agents, and corticosteroids for several commonly encountered clinical settings and patient populations, and (2) to provide recommendations to clinicians to aid them in selecting a particular aerosol delivery device for their patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of pertinent randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) was undertaken using MEDLINE, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library databases. A broad search strategy was chosen, combining terms related to aerosol devices or drugs with the diseases of interest in various patient groups and clinical settings. Only RCTs in which the same drug was administered with different devices were included. RCTs (394 trials) assessing inhaled corticosteroid, beta2-agonist, and anticholinergic agents delivered by an MDI, an MDI with a spacer/holding chamber, a nebulizer, or a DPI were identified for the years 1982 to 2001. A total of 254 outcomes were tabulated. Of the 131 studies that met the eligibility criteria, only 59 (primarily those that tested beta2-agonists) proved to have useable data.

RESULTS

None of the pooled metaanalyses showed a significant difference between devices in any efficacy outcome in any patient group for each of the clinical settings that was investigated. The adverse effects that were reported were minimal and were related to the increased drug dose that was delivered. Each of the delivery devices provided similar outcomes in patients using the correct technique for inhalation.

CONCLUSIONS

Devices used for the delivery of bronchodilators and steroids can be equally efficacious. When selecting an aerosol delivery device for patients with asthma and COPD, the following should be considered: device/drug availability; clinical setting; patient age and the ability to use the selected device correctly; device use with multiple medications; cost and reimbursement; drug administration time; convenience in both outpatient and inpatient settings; and physician and patient preference.

The dose-response relationship of inhaled corticosteroids in asthma

Inhaled corticosteroids are the only class of asthma medication that can reduce symptoms, improve lung function, reduce the frequency of severe exacerbations, including hospital and ICU admissions, and decrease the risk of mortality. The therapeutic dose range for all clinical outcome measures in adults is 100 to 1000 mg/d of beclomethasone dipropionate or budesonide, or 50 to 500 mg/d of fluticasone propionate. Doses in excess of this range are not recommended for routine use because they are likely to increase the risk of systemic side-effects without further major improvement in efficacy. The recommendations are qualified by the recognition that there is considerable individual variability in the response to inhaled corticosteroids in asthma, which would suggest that some patients might obtain greater benefit at higher doses, just as some might obtain maximum benefit at lower doses.

Oral corticosteroid-sparing effects of inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of persistent and acute asthma

OBJECTIVE

To review the efficacy and safety of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) when used to reduce daily oral corticosteroid (OCS) requirements in patients with severe persistent asthma and periodic requirements in patients with acute asthma exacerbations.

DATA SOURCES

Clinical studies of the OCS-sparing effects of ICSs were located by searching MEDLINE databases from 1966 onward using the terms oral, steroid, and asthma in combination with the generic names for each marketed ICS.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting on the use of ICSs to reduce OCS requirements in patients with persistent and acute asthma are included.

RESULTS

Clinical study results consistently show that ICSs significantly improve asthma control and reduce OCS requirements among adults, children, and infants with persistent asthma. A dose reduction or complete discontinuation of use of OCSs is possible in most patients without loss of asthma control. ICSs also can control asthma during acute asthma exacerbations and reduce the need for short courses of OCSs. With many ICSs, the reductions in OCS use are accompanied by recovery of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function, indicating that the safety of asthma therapy is improved when OCS requirements are decreased with ICSs. Of the available ICSs that may reduce OCS needs, budesonide appears to be the most intensively studied.

CONCLUSIONS

ICSs can reduce OCS requirements in adults and children with persistent asthma and during acute asthma exacerbations. The reduced systemic corticosteroid activity associated with ICS treatment improves the overall safety of asthma therapy.

Ethical assessment of clinical asthma trials including children subjects

BACKGROUND

The inclusion of children with asthma in clinical asthma trials is increasing, including their participation in placebo-controlled trials (PCTs). The objectives of this study are to assess whether children with asthma have been harmed by their participation in PCTs.

METHODS

Seventy clinical asthma trials involving children published between January 1998 and December 2001 that involved distinct US research populations were identified. Studies were reviewed to determine whether all subjects with more than mild asthma received daily antiinflammatory medication as recommended by national guidelines. Sixty-two clinical asthma trials included data about subject withdrawal and were analyzed for the frequency of asthma exacerbations.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies were designed as PCTs and did not require that all subjects with more than mild asthma receive antiinflammatory medications. Of 24,953 subjects, 4653 (19%) for whom data are available withdrew from research, and 1247 subjects (9.4%) withdrew from PCTs due to asthma exacerbations compared with 358 subjects (3.1%) in other trials. In PCTs, subjects withdrew more frequently from the placebo arms than the active-treatment arms and did so more frequently because of an asthma exacerbation (667 or 15% vs 580 or 6.5%). Fifty-two studies enrolled both children and adults, although only 1 performed subset analysis of the children.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects enrolled in PCTs of asthma have been exposed to unnecessary risks and harms. Clinical asthma trials involving children and adults do not benefit children as a class because they rarely provide subset analysis of children subjects.

Withdrawal from treatment as an outcome in the ISOLDE study of COPD

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the determinants of patient withdrawal from our study, and the effect of these withdrawals on the outcome of treatment with inhaled corticosteroids in patients with COPD.

DESIGN

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial.

SETTING

Eighteen outpatient centers in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

Seven hundred fifty-one patients with stable COPD defined clinically and as baseline postbronchodilator FEV(1) > or = 0.8 L and < 85% predicted, FEV(1)/FVC ratio < 70%, and FEV(1) change after albuterol < 10% of predicted.

INTERVENTION

Random assignment of either 500 microg bid of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) using a spacer device or an identical placebo inhaler. Treatment was continued for 3 years or until patients withdrew from follow-up.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Postbronchodilator FEV(1) was measured on three occasions before randomization and every 3 months thereafter. Health status was assessed by the disease-specific St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the modified short-form 36 questionnaire (SF-36) at baseline and every 6 months. Three hundred thirty-nine patients withdrew, of whom 156 patients received FP. Prescription of frequent courses of oral prednisolone was the most common reason for withdrawing as specified in the protocol (69 patients in the FP group withdrew due to respiratory symptoms, compared with 93 patients in the placebo group). This explained the significantly greater dropout of placebo-treated patients that was most evident when FEV(1) was < 50% predicted. Patients withdrawing had a significantly more rapid decline in health status, measured by both the SGRQ and the SF-36 (p < 0.001). Those withdrawing from the placebo group had a more rapid decline in FEV(1) and more exacerbations than the FP-treated groups. Baseline FEV(1) was lower in dropouts than in patients completing the study receiving placebo, but there was no difference between the respective groups receiving FP.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who withdrew from follow-up were those with the most rapidly deteriorating health status and lung function. Losing these patients from the final analysis can reduce the power of a study to achieve its primary end point.

Improvement in health-related quality of life with fluticasone propionate compared with budesonide or beclomethasone dipropionate in adults with severe asthma

OBJECTIVE

Changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were evaluated in adults with severe asthma following inhaled corticosteroid treatment with high-dose beclomethasone dipropionate or budesonide (BDP/BUD) and compared with fluticasone propionate taken at approximately half the dose of BDP/BUD.

METHODOLOGY

HRQoL was assessed as part of an open, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group study in Australia evaluating the safety and efficacy of switching to fluticasone propionate (FP) 1000-2000 micro g/day (n = 67) compared with remaining on BDP/BUD >/=1750 micro g/day (n = 66) for 6 months. Patients completed two HRQoL questionnaires, the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36), at baseline and at weeks 12 and 24. A change in AQLQ score of >/=0.5 was considered to be clinically meaningful.

RESULTS

There were significant improvements in HRQoL with FP on four of the eight dimensions on the SF-36 (i.e. physical functioning, general health, role-emotional, and mental health), while there were no significant improvements in HRQoL in the BDP/BUD group. Overall, patients in the FP group experienced significantly greater improvement (P < 0.001) in AQLQ scores at weeks 12 and 24 compared with the BDP/BUD group. On the individual domains of the AQLQ, there were significant treatment differences (P < 0.01) in favour of FP in three of the four domains (activity limitations [0.92], symptoms [0.73], and emotional function [1.02]). Mean differences between groups for overall score and these three domains were also clinically meaningful.

CONCLUSION

Patients with severe asthma who received FP (at approximately half the dose of BDP/BUD) experienced statistically significant, as well as clinically meaningful, improvements in their HRQoL.

Clinically important differences in health-related quality of life for patients with asthma: an expert consensus panel report

BACKGROUND

Standards for change in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures used among asthmatic patients have been established by considering only patient preferences to determine important differences and may not reflect an informed clinical evaluation of change.

OBJECTIVE

To establish clinically important difference (CID) standards through the consensus of an expert physician panel for the Juniper Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) and Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36, version 2) when used to measure HRQoL among asthmatic patients.

METHODS

We organized an 8-person panel of physicians familiar with measuring HRQoL among asthmatic patients with the AQLQ and the SF-36. This expert panel participated in 2 rounds of a modified Delphi process before attending an in-person consensus meeting to establish the CID standards for small, moderate, and large changes in the AQLQ and the SF-36. After the consensus meeting, the panel used an iterative improvement process to cooperatively complete their final report.

RESULTS

The expert panel's thresholds for detecting CIDs in the domains of the AQLQ were much higher than previously established levels using patient-perceived changes. CIDs for asthma were also ascertained on the scales of the SF-36, version 2, which were markedly greater than previously cited cross-sectional differences between patient groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The CID standards established by this expert panel elucidate a potential distinction between patient and physician perspectives of important HRQoL changes. The many stakeholders of HRQoL difference standards should consider this distinction when adopting standards to evaluate patient change.

Reduction in oral corticosteroid use with mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler improves health-related quality of life in patients with severe persistent asthma

Severe persistent asthma can have a substantial impact on a patient's health-related quality of life (HRQL), both as a result of symptoms and from side effects of treatment. The HRQL impact of two doses (400 and 800 microg twice daily) of mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler (MF DPI) was compared with placebo in patients with severe persistent asthma previously maintained on oral steroids as a component of a previously published randomized, 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. A 9-month open-label extension (OLE), with all patients treated with MF DPI, followed. Patients 12 years of age or older completed a generic HRQL measure, the Medical Outcomes Trust Short Form-36 (SF-36), and an asthma-specific measure, the Marks Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ-M), at baseline, at endpoint (last evaluable visit) of the double-blind phase (EODBP), and after the first 3 months of the OLE. Of 132 patients enrolled in the study, 128 provided HRQL data at baseline and at EODBP. Mean SF-36 scores at baseline showed significant HRQL impairment compared with U.S. general population norms. With treatment, the reduction in oral corticosteroid (OCS) requirements of the MF-DPI-treated groups was accompanied by significant (p < 0.05) improvement over placebo in the physical domain of HRQL (SF-36 physical component summary score and the physical function subscale) at EODBP. MF-DPI-treated patients also showed significant improvements at EODBP in each of the four subscales of the AQLQ-M (p<0.05). From EODBP to the OLE 3-month endpoint, patients treated with MF DPI twice daily maintained, or improved, SF-36 scores in most domains. Symptomatic improvement and reduction in OCS use with MF DPI were accompanied by significant improvement in HRQL in patients with severe persistent asthma. These improvements were maintained during the 3-month period of the OLE in which HRQL was evaluated.

Health-related quality of life and future health care utilization for asthma

BACKGROUND

Although health-related quality of life (HRQL) has been increasingly used as an outcome in asthma, its utility for identifying patients at risk for adverse asthma outcomes has not been established.

OBJECTIVE

In a prospective cohort study, to evaluate the longitudinal impact of HRQL on future health care utilization and cost among adults with asthma, accounting for known risk factors for utilization.

METHODS

A stratified random sample of 3,482 adult Northern CA Kaiser Permanente members with asthma was selected using computerized utilization databases and a screening survey item. Subjects completed a mail survey that included measures of generic (SF-12) and asthma-specific HRQL (ITG-Asthma Short Form battery). During the 12 months after survey completion, computerized utilization and cost data were ascertained.

RESULTS

Better baseline asthma-specific HRQL was associated with a decreased risk of asthma-related emergency department visit or hospitalization during longitudinal followup (odds ratio per 10-point score increment 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 to 0.95), controlling for demographic and clinical factors. Better baseline generic physical HRQL was associated with a decreased risk of future all-cause hospitalization (odds ratio 0.68; 95% CI 0.60 to 0.77). More favorable asthma-specific HRQL scores were also related to decreased asthma-related health care costs during the ensuing year (-0.086 log-dollars per 10-point score increment; 95% CI -0.11 to -0.06). Better generic physical HRQL scores were associated with lower total costs (-0.24 log-dollars; 95% CI -0.32 to -0.17).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort of adult health maintenance organization members with asthma, asthma-specific HRQL was associated with future asthma-related utilization and cost.

Assessment of asthma severity and treatment by GPs in Belgium: an Asthma Drug Utilization Research Study (ADUR)

A prospective study was performed between June 1996 and December 1997, to identify how general practitioners (GPs) in Belgium assess asthma severity and how they treat asthma according to their severity assessment. Three hundred and sixty-five GPs included 1376 already diagnosed and treated asthmatics. The GPs used a questionnaire providing data on patient demographics, aetiology of asthma, symptoms and medication use. The patients provided a complete diary card of day and night symptoms and morning and evening peak expiratory flow rates during a 3-week period. Asthma severity as assessed by GPs was compared with the severity according to the GINA guidelines. Along the same line, asthma treatment was evaluated according to the GPs assessment of severity and according to the GINA guidelines. Confronting the assessment of asthma severity by the GPs with the GINA criteria revealed that about 20% and 2% of the patients' asthma severity respectively were under- and over-estimated, respectively (using a discrepancy between GPs and GINA assessment of severity by 2 or more classes). Using the GINA criteria for treatment, only 37.5% of the patients seemed to be correctly treated. Taking a discrepancy between GINA assessment and treatment of two classes as an error, 2.3% and 23.4% of the asthmatics are over- and under-treated, respectively. In conclusion, this study provides evidence that GINA guidelines seem not to be adequately interpreted and implemented by GPs in Belgium. Improvement of the assessment of asthma severity is definitely needed and may lead to more appropriate use of asthma medication.

A meta-analysis of the dose-response relationship of inhaled corticosteroids in adolescents and adults with mild to moderate persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Although inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are commonly used in the treatment of persistent asthma, the relationship between dose and clinical response remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated whether ICS exhibit a dose-response relationship in the treatment of mild to moderate persistent asthma.

METHODS

This was a meta-analysis of published randomized clinical trials concerning the relationship between ICS dose and response in asthma. Relevant studies were identified through a search of PubMed and MEDLINE for articles on asthma and ICS published between January 1996 and January 2001. The search was limited to publications classified as clinical trials that included the text words asthma and corticosteroids, glucocorticoids, beclomethasone, budesonide, fluticasone, flunisolide, mometasone, or triamcinolone acetonide. Five clinical measures were considered: morning peak expiratory flow rate (AM PEFR), evening PEFR (PM PEFR), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)), beta-agonist use, and asthma symptom score (severity of symptoms on a given day, as evaluated by patients).

RESULTS

Forty-three studies were identified, of which 16 met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. These studies involved 4 agents: fluticasone propionate, triamcinolone acetonide, budesonide, and mometasone furoate. A statistically significant dose response in AM PEFR was observed with fluticasone propionate, triamcinolone acetonide, and budesonide (respective 95% CIs, 4.9 to 11.5, 4.7 to 18.0, and 5.8 to 24.9). A statistically significant dose response to fluticasone propionate and triamcinolone acetonide was also observed in PM PEFR (95% CIs, 2.0 to 8.7 and 2.4 to 13.7) and asthma symptom score (95% CI, -0.069 to -0.002 and -0.60 to -0.10). In terms of FEV(1), the dose response was statistically significant only with budesonide (95% CI, 0.025 to 0.17). Dose-response relationships were not disproportionately driven by the highest doses, and the greatest effects on response were seen at doses below or at the low end of the recommended range, suggesting that use of high doses of ICS may contribute only marginally to efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Dose-response relationships were not uniformly observed with all drugs or for all measures of response. Use of higher doses of ICS in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma does not appear to increase the efficacy of these drugs.

The cost effectiveness of early treatment with fluticasone propionate 250 microg twice a day in subjects with obstructive airway disease. Results of the DIMCA program

In a two-stage detection program, subjects with signs of obstructive airway disease were selected from a random sample of the general population. Subjects (n = 82) were randomly assigned to either fluticasone propionate 250 microg twice a day or placebo twice a day via pMDI in a 1-yr, double-blind trial if they met criteria for persistent airway obstruction, increased bronchial hyperresponsiveness, or a rapid decline in FEV(1). Main outcome measures were postbronchodilator FEV(1), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and direct medical cost. Secondary measures were prebronchodilator FEV(1), PC(20), health-related quality of life (CRQ), symptom-free weeks, episode-free weeks, exacerbations, and indirect cost. Subgroup analysis was based on reversibility of obstruction. Analysis revealed a significant gain in postbronchodilator FEV(1) (98 ml/yr; p = 0.01) in favor of fluticasone. Only subjects with reversible obstruction showed an improvement in PC(20) (1.4 doubling dose; p = 0.03). Early treatment resulted in 2.7 QALYs gained per 100 treated subjects (p = 0.17) and in a clinically relevant improvement in dyspnea (CRQ; p < 0.03). The incremental cost effectiveness ratios were US$13,016/QALY for early treatment and US$33,921/QALY for the combination of detection and treatment. The incremental cost for one additional subject with a clinically relevant difference in dyspnea was US$1,674. In conclusion, early intervention with fluticasone resulted in significant health gains at relatively low financial cost.

Allergic rhinitis and asthma in children: disease management and outcomes

Antihistamines and inhaled glucocorticoids, which can be targeted toward multiple points in the "allergic cascade" underlying allergic rhinitis and asthma, extend the promise of enhanced outcomes in children with allergic rhinitis, asthma, or both. Antihistamine therapy confers significant relief of subjective ratings of seasonal and perennial allergic symptoms (e.g., rhinorrhea, congestion, sneezing, pruritus), whereas topical steroids alleviate such discomfort while also improving objective anatomic and functional indices of nasal patency (e.g., nasal peak inspiratory flow). Youngsters with asthma also experience substantial clinical benefits from inhaled steroids, which improve objective measures of pulmonary function and reduce rescue beta 2-agonists for symptom management and quality-of-life enhancement. This paper reviews recent clinical findings on the role of antihistamines and topical corticosteroids in pediatric allergy and asthma management, as well as the favorable effects of these medications on both objective and subjective health outcomes.

The effect of different concentrations of lactose powder on the airway function of adult asthmatics

Lactose is widely used as a carrier of drugs in inhalation devices for asthmatic patients, but some clinicans have suspected that it may cause bronchoconstriction. Only a few studies have been done to examine this and the results are not uniform. This study was conducted to determine the effects of inhalation grade lactose delivered by Diskhaler on lung function and airway conductance in asthmatic subjects. The effect of five doses of lactose ranging from 6.25 mg to 100 mg and placebo were investigated using spirometry and constant volume plethysmography. Nineteen subjects (nine females) with stable asthma and a proven reversibility of at least 12% in forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV) (compared to baseline) in the last 6 months, were included in this single-centre, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over study. The subjects received placebo plus five doses of lactose on one study day and six doses of placebo on another study day. Both doses and study days were assigned in a random order, and intervals of 1 h were allowed between each dose and at least 36 h between study days. Specific airways conductance (sGaw) and FEV were measured periodically over the course of 1 h after each dose of lactose or placebo. Administration of lactose at four or eight times the concentration in the Diskus and Diskhaler dry powder inhalers did not result in any statistically significant changes in FEV1. sGaw also showed no statistical difference between lactose and placebo at 1 or 3 min post-dosing. Both placebo and lactose produced both dilatation and constriction of the airways in the same patients, with no consistency in direction and no dose-response relationship. No adverse effect of lactose on a rways conductance or FEV1 of stable asthmatic patients was found in this study when given at higher than normal clinical doses.

Dose-response relation of inhaled fluticasone propionate in adolescents and adults with asthma: meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the dose-response relation of inhaled fluticasone propionate in adolescents and adults with asthma.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of placebo controlled, randomised clinical trials that presented data on at least one outcome measure of asthma and that used at least two different doses of fluticasone.

SETTING

Medline, Embase, and GlaxoWellcome's internal clinical study registers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

FEV(1), morning and evening peak expiratory flow, night awakenings, beta agonist use, and major exacerbations.

RESULTS

Eight studies, with 2324 adolescents and adults with asthma, met the inclusion criteria. Data on doses of >500 microg/day were limited. The dose-response curve for the raw data began to reach a plateau at around 100-200 microg/day and peaked by 500 microg/day. A negative exponential model for the data, without meta-analysis, indicated that 80% of the benefit at 1000 microg/day was achieved at doses of 70-170 microg/day and 90% by 100-250 microg/day. A quadratic meta-regression showed that the maximum achievable efficacy was obtained by doses of around 500 microg/day. The odds ratio for patients remaining in a study at a dose of 200 microg/day, compared with higher doses, was 0.73 (95% confidence interval 0.49 to 1.08). Comparison of the standardised difference in FEV(1 )for an inhaled dose of 200 microg/day against higher doses showed a difference in FEV(1) of 0.13 of a standard deviation (-0.02 to 0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

In adolescent and adult patients with asthma, most of the therapeutic benefit of inhaled fluticasone is achieved with a total daily dose of 100-250 microg, and the maximum effect is achieved with a dose of around 500 microg/day. However, these findings were limited by the lack of data on individual patients and by the paucity of dose-response studies that included doses of >500 microg/day.

Improvement in health care utilization and pulmonary function with fluticasone propionate in patients with steroid-dependent asthma at a National Asthma Referral Center

The impact of switching from other inhaled corticosteroids to fluticasone propionate was studied in patients with severe oral-steroid-dependent asthma over a 1-year period. In this open-label prospective study, patients on maintenance doses of oral and inhaled steroids were referred to a national asthma treatment center and were switchedfrom their previous inhaled corticosteroid to fluticasone propionate 880 microg BID. Compared with data collected from the year prior to enrollment, treatment with fluticasone propionate resulted in significant improvements in pulmonary function, oral steroid requirements, and health resource utilization. In addition, five patients were completely weaned off oral steroids.