Safety and efficacy of a high cumulative dose of salbutamol inhaled via Turbuhaler or via a pressurized metered-dose inhaler in patients with asthma

Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical efficacy of albuterol RespiClick(™) dry-powder inhaler in the treatment of asthma

INTRODUCTION

Incorrect use of inhaler devices by patients with asthma is common and can adversely affect clinical outcomes. Devices that are straightforward to use are less likely to result in dosing errors and can improve patients' satisfaction with therapy and adherence. A novel dry-powder formulation of the rescue bronchodilator albuterol (salbutamol) administered using a multidose dry-powder inhaler (mDPI; RespiClick™) has recently been approved in the USA.

AREAS COVERED

Studies on the albuterol mDPI were identified in searches of PubMed and www.clinicaltrials.gov . Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, efficacy, and safety data, and patients' experiences with the albuterol mDPI are presented.

EXPERT OPINION

The albuterol mDPI has an efficacy/tolerability profile consistent with other inhaled forms of albuterol, and is reliable, easy to use, and associated with a high level of patient satisfaction. This is the first albuterol dry-powder inhaler (DPI) to become available in the USA, with most other formulations being delivered using a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI). The availability of a breath-actuated device avoids the challenge of coordinating actuation and breathing when using pMDIs, and could simplify treatment for patients also using a DPI for controller medication. Additional features of RespiClick, such as an integrated dose counter and minimal pre-inhalation preparation, facilitate its use.

Twelve- and 52-week safety of albuterol multidose dry powder inhaler in patients with persistent asthma

Objective: Evaluate the safety of albuterol multidose dry powder inhaler (MDPI), a novel, inhalation-driven device that does not require coordination of actuation with inhalation, in patients with persistent asthma. Methods: We report pooled safety data from two 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, repeat-dose, parallel-group studies and the 12-week double-blind phase of a 52-week multicenter safety study as well as safety data from the 40-week open-label phase of the 52-week safety study. In each study, eligible patients aged ≥12 years with persistent asthma received placebo MDPI or albuterol MDPI 180 µg (2 inhalations × 90 µg/inhalation) 4 times/day for 12 weeks. In the 40-week open-label phase of the 52-week safety study, patients received albuterol MDPI 180 μg (2 inhalations × 90 μg/inhalation) as needed (PRN). Results: During both 12-week studies and the 12-week double-blind phase of the 52-week study, adverse events were more common with placebo MDPI (50%; n = 333) than albuterol MDPI (40%; n = 321); most frequent were upper respiratory tract infection (placebo MDPI 11%, albuterol MDPI 10%), nasopharyngitis (6%, 5%), and headache (6%, 4%). Incidences of β₂-agonist-related events (excluding headache) during the pooled 12-week dosing periods were low (≤1%) in both groups. The safety profile with albuterol MDPI PRN during the 40-week open-label phase [most frequent adverse events: nasopharyngitis (12%), sinusitis (11%), upper respiratory tract infection (9%)] was similar to that observed during the 12-week pooled analysis. Conclusions: The safety profile of albuterol MDPI 180 μg in these studies was comparable with placebo MDPI and consistent with the well-characterized profile of albuterol in patients with asthma.

Comparing MDI and DPI aerosol deposition using in vitro experiments and a new stochastic individual path (SIP) model of the conducting airways

PURPOSE

Deposition characteristics of MDI and DPI aerosols were compared throughout the conducting airways for the first time using a combination of in vitro experiments and a newly developed stochastic individual path (SIP) model for different inhalation profiles.

METHODS

In vitro experiments were used to determine initial particle distribution profiles and to validate computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model results for a MDI and DPI delivering the same dose of drug in a geometry of the mouth-throat and tracheobronchial airways. The validated CFD model was then used to predict the transport and deposition of the drug using correct and incorrect inhalation profiles for each inhaler.

RESULTS

The MDI delivered approximately two times more drug to the tracheobronchial region compared with the DPI for both correct and incorrect inhalation profiles. Errors in inhalation reduced the deposited tracheobronchial dose by approximately 30% for both inhalers. The DPI delivered the largest dose to the mouth-throat (~70%) and the MDI delivered the largest dose to the alveolar airways (~50%).

CONCLUSIONS

The developed in silico model provides new insights into the lung delivery of pharmaceutical aerosols and can be applied in future studies in combination with pharmacokinetic analysis to establish bioequivalence between devices.

Peak inspiratory flow rates generated through the Novolizer and the Turbuhaler dry powder inhaler devices by children with stable asthma

We compared the peak inspiratory flows (PIF) generated through a novel dry powder inhaler device, the Novolizer (PIF-N), and the Turbuhaler (PIF-T). Forty-six pediatric patients with stable bronchial asthma were randomized in an open-label, multicenter, crossover trial. No drug was administered during the inhalation maneuvers that were spaced by 10 min. There was neither a carryover nor a sequence effect. The patients were characterized by mean age of 8.5 years, mean FEV(1) of 1.79 L, and mean PIF without any device (baseline, PIF-B) of 185 L/min. Through the devices mean PIF-N of 94 L/min and mean PIF-T of 69 L/min were achieved, calculated from the maxima of three inhalations. This resulted in p < 0.0001 for the difference. The median PIFN/PIF-T ratio was estimated as 1.39. Each child achieved a higher PIF-N than PIF-T and was able to release the feedback mechanisms of the Novolizer indicating sufficient inhalation performance. We conclude that the PIF through the Novolizer is higher than the PIF through the Turbuhaler in stable asthmatic children. The flow rates achieved through the Novolizer allow for sufficient lung deposition even in children as young as 6 years.

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.

Efeito do salbutamol liberado através de inalador de pó seco sobre o broncoespasmo induzido por metacolina

INTRODUÇÃO: Os beta2-agonistas de curta duração sob a forma de nebulímetro pressurizado são os fármacos utilizados rotineiramente na reversão do broncoespasmo induzido pela metacolina. A administração desses fármacos na forma de pó seco, liberados por inaladores de pó seco pode ser uma alternativa eficaz. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a efetividade e rapidez de ação do salbutamol liberado através de inalador de pó seco pulvinal (Butovent®) na reversão do broncoespasmo induzido por metacolina, comparando-o com o salbutamol liberado por nebulímetro pressurizado. MÉTODO: Foram avaliados prospectivamente 60 pacientes sucessivos com broncoespasmo induzido por metacolina, cuja queda do volume expiratório forçado no primeiro segundo (VEF1) foi de, no mínimo, 20%. Foram randomizados 30 pacientes para receber 200 mcg de salbutamol liberado por nebulímetro pressurizado e 30 pacientes para receber 200 mcg de salbutamol através de inalador de pó seco (pulvinal), na etapa final do teste de broncoprovocação, com o objetivo de reverter o broncoespasmo induzido pela metacolina. Foram avaliados os VEF1 obtidos 1 minuto e 5 minutos após a administração do broncodilatador. RESULTADOS: Os grupos foram pareados por sexo, idade, peso, altura, dose provocativa causadora de queda de 20% no VEF1 (primeiro grupo: 1,3 mg ; segundo grupo: 1,19 mg; p = 0,79) e VEF1 pós-metacolina (primeiro grupo: 2,03 l; segundo grupo: 1,99 l; p = 0,87), sem diferença significativa entre eles. O incremento médio do VEF1 foi de 16,2% (1 minuto) e 22,2% (5 minutos) no primeiro grupo e de 17% (1 minuto) e 23,6% (5 minutos) no segundo grupo, não havendo diferença estatística entre eles (p = 0,8). CONCLUSÕES: Os beta2-agonistas administrados através de inalador de pó seco (pulvinal) apresentam a mesma eficácia broncodilatadora e rapidez de ação que no tradicional método por nebulímetro pressurizado.

Clinical efficacy of inhaler devices containing beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators in the treatment of asthma: cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of more than 100 randomized, controlled trials

BACKGROUND

A number of different inhaler devices are available to deliver beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonist (beta(2)-agonist) bronchodilators in asthma. These include hydrofluoroalkane or chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-free propelled pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), many dry powder inhalers and breath-actuated inhalers.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical efficacy of all available hand-held inhaler devices compared with the standard CFC-containing pMDI for the delivery of short-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators in nonacute asthma in both children and adults.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out of all available randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) using the standard pMDI compared with any other hand-held inhaler device, delivering short-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators in patients with stable asthma.

RESULTS

One hundred and eighteen RCTs were included in this review. No clinical differences were found between the standard CFC-containing pMDI and 12 other hand-held inhaler devices for most outcome measures. We found no evidence of clinical differences between studies using either a 1 : 1 (pMDI: another inhaler) or a 2 : 1 dosing ratio.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stable asthma, short-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators in standard CFC-pMDIs are as effective as any other hand-held inhaler device; therefore the cheapest available device that the patient is able to use should always be considered. Pharmaceutical companies should in future submit to regulatory authorities clinical outcome data (as opposed to in vitro data) in support of any dosing schedules greater than 1 : 1 when compared with the standard pMDI. Clinical effectiveness studies that use an intention-to-treat analysis and report more patient-centered outcomes are required.

The influence of inhaler selection on efficacy of asthma therapies

Many different devices are available to aid inhalational drug delivery. Although each device is claimed to have advantages over its rivals, the evidence to support greater efficacy of a particular device is scanty. Most comparative studies are underpowered or flawed in their design. They may use inappropriate end-points, or involve healthy subjects, whose response may be very different from the patient with acute severe asthma. The dosage of drug used in a trial may be at the shallow part of the dose-response curve, masking differences in devices. Only in a few cases have clinical trials detected a significant difference between devices, and trials have rarely taken patient preference into account. The most efficacious device in practice is likely to be the one that the patient will use regularly and in accordance with a health care workers' recommendations.

Inhaler devices for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive airways disease (COPD)

The research evidence on the effectiveness of inhaler devices for the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease published in a recent issue of Effective Health Care is reviewed.

Relative therapeutic index between inhaled formoterol and salbutamol in asthma patients

A double-blind, randomized crossover study in 28 asthmatic patients assessed the relative therapeutic index for inhaled formoterol and salbutamol. Pre-drug administration FEV1 (mean 2.08 l) was 49-93% of predicted and reversibility 16-82% after inhalation of salbutamol. Patients inhaled single doses of formoterol (Oxis) (4.5,18 and 54 microg, delivered doses) via Turbuhaler, salbutamol (Ventolin) (200 and 1800 microg) via pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI) and placebo at intervals of 48 h or more. Individual maximum FEV1 and minimum S-K+ were calculated. Relative local (maximum FEV1) and systemic (minimum S-K+) dose potencies, and their ratio, the relative therapeutic index, were estimated using a non-linear mixed effect model. The drug effects were well tolerated and dose dependent. A log-linear approximation was used to describe the bronchodilatory effect, whereas a sigmoid approximation was more apt to describe the decrease in serum potassium concentration. A bivariate dose-response model based on these principles was fitted simultaneously to all data. The mean relative therapeutic index between formoterol 4.5-54 microg given via Turbuhaler and salbutamol 200-1800 microg given via pMDI was estimated to be 2.5 in favour of formoterol; this trend was not statistically significant.

Evolution of dry powder inhaler design, formulation, and performance

Many companies are now prioritizing the development of dry powder inhalers (DPIs) above pressurized formulations of asthma drugs. A well-designed DPI and an appropriate powder formulation can optimize the effectiveness of inhaled drug therapy. A DPI must be able to deliver medications effectively for most patients, and an ideal inhaler would provide a dose that does not vary with inspiratory flow rate. Recent regulatory guidelines, among which the U.S. FDA draft guidance is the most stringent, demand consistent dose delivery from an inhaler throughout its life and consistency of doses from one inhaler to another. However, the properties of free micronized powders often interfere with drug handling and with drug delivery reducing dose consistency. Recent advances in formulation technology can increase lung dose and reduce its variability. While a perfect DPI may never exist, both device and formulation technology are evolving to rectify perceived deficiencies in earlier systems.

Deposition and pharmacokinetics of flunisolide delivered from pressurized inhalers containing non-CFC and CFC propellants

Our objective was to assess the deposition and pharmacokinetics of a novel formulation of flunisolide (Aerobid, Forest Laboratories) in hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) 134a delivered by pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI). The design was a two-way crossover investigation in 12 healthy male subjects comparing HFA-134a flunisolide by pMDI versus pMDI plus 50 mL spacer device. Four of these subjects also took part in a two-way crossover investigation comparing chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) flunisolide pMDI versus pMDI plus Aerochamber holding chamber. The imaging technique of gamma scintigraphy was used to quantify total and regional lung deposition of flunisolide. Plasma levels of flunisolide and its major metabolite (6beta-OH flunisolide) were also determined. The spacer and Aerochamber reduced oropharyngeal deposition dramatically for both the HFA and CFC products (mean 59.8 to 14.9% (p < 0.01) of ex-valve (metered) dose for HFA product; 66.3 to 12.3% (p < 0.01) of ex-valve dose for CFC product) owing to deposition of part of the dose on the walls of the add-on devices themselves. Lung deposition averaged 22.6 and 40.4% (p < 0.01) of the ex-valve dose for the HFA formulation used with pMDI alone and with pMDI plus spacer. Mean lung deposition of the CFC formulation delivered via the Aerochamber (mean 23.4%) was higher than that for the CFC pMDI alone (mean 17.0%), but this difference was not statistically significant. Lung deposition expressed as percentage ex-device (delivered) dose averaged 68.3% for HFA pMDI plus spacer and 19.7% for CFC pMDI. Plasma levels of flunisolide were higher for the pMDI plus spacer than for pMDI alone, reflecting higher lung deposition via the spacer, but plasma levels of the 6beta-OH flunisolide metabolite were higher for the pMDI alone as a consequence of higher oropharyngeal deposition. When delivered via the spacer, pulmonary targeting of the flunisolide HFA formulation was improved compared with the CFC formulation, which should benefit patients by providing satisfactory asthma therapy from a much-reduced delivered dose of flunisolide.

Pressurised metered dose inhalers versus all other hand-held inhaler devices to deliver beta-2 agonist bronchodilators for non-acute asthma

BACKGROUND

A number of different inhaler devices are available to deliver beta2-agonist bronchodilators in asthma. These include hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) or chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-free propelled pressurised metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) and dry powder devices.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness of pMDI compared with any other available handheld inhaler device for the delivery of short-acting beta-2 agonist bronchodilators in non-acute asthma in children and adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Collaboration Clinical Trials register was searched for studies as well as separate additional searches carried out on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and also on the Current Contents Index as well as the Science Citation Index. In addition, 17 individual online respiratory journals and 12 electronically available clinical trial databases were also searched. The UK pharmaceutical companies who manufacture inhaled asthma medication were contacted in order to obtain details of any published or unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

- The full texts of all potentially relevant articles were reviewed independently by two reviewers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Fixed and random effect models were used. Dichotomous outcomes were assessed using Odds Ratios or Relative Risks (RR) with 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-four randomised controlled trials were included in this review, but few could be combined to assess a specific outcome for a given delivery device comparison. Only two studies required demonstration of adequate pMDI technique as an entry requirement. There were no difference between a standard CFC containing pMDI and any other device for most outcomes. Regular use of HFA-pMDI containing salbutamol reduced the requirement for short courses of oral corticosteroids (3 trials, 519 patients: RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.49, 0.91); however the total number of exacerbations were unchanged (3 trials, 1271 patients: RR 1.0; 95% CI 0.75, 1.33).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stable asthma, short-acting beta-2 bronchodilators in standard CFC-pMDI's are as effective as any other devices. The effect of HFA-pMDI on requirement for oral corticosteroid courses to treat acute exacerbations should be confirmed. Effectiveness studies that use an intention-to-treat analysis are required.

The efficacy of a new salbutamol metered-dose powder inhaler in comparison with two other inhaler devices

An open cross-over and randomized study was carried out in order to compare the efficacy and safety of inhaled salbutamol delivered from a new 50 microg dose(-1) metered-dose dry powder inhaler Taifun, and a commercially available 50 microg dose(-1) dry powder inhaler Turbuhaler, and a conventional 100 microg dose(-1) pressurized metered-dose inhaler with a spacer (pMDI+S). Twenty-one patients, aged 21-70 years, with stable asthma and with demonstrated reversibility upon inhalation of salbutamol were included in the study. On three separate study days, the patients received a total dose of 400 microg of salbutamol from the dry powder inhalers and a dose of 800 microg from the pMDI+S in a cumulative fashion: 1,1, 2 and 4 doses at 30 min intervals. The percent change in forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1), was used as the primary efficacy variable. Salbutamol inhaled via the Taifun produced greater bronchodilation than the other devices. The difference in percent change in FEV1 between the Taifun and the other devices was statistically significant at the two first dose levels, but diminished towards the higher doses when the plateau of the dose-response curve was reached. The estimated relative dose potency of the Taifun was approximately 1.9- and 2.8-fold compared to the Turbuhaler and the pMDI+S, respectively. The Taifun caused a slight, but clinically insignificant, decrease in serum potassium concentration. There were no significant changes in the other safety parameters (blood pressure, heart rate and electrocardiogram recordings) with any of the used devices. In conclusion, this study indicates that salbutamol inhaled via the Taifun is more potentthan salbutamol inhaled from the other devices tested. In practise, a smaller total dose of salbutamol from theTaifun is needed to produce a similar bronchodilatory response. All treatments were equally well tolerated.

Systematic review of clinical effectiveness of pressurised metered dose inhalers versus other hand held inhaler devices for delivering beta (2 )agonists bronchodilators in asthma

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness of pressurised metered dose inhalers compared with other hand held inhaler devices for delivering short acting beta(2) agonists in stable asthma.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Airways Group specialised trials database (which includes hand searching of 20 relevant journals), Medline, Embase, Cochrane controlled clinical trials register, pharmaceutical companies, and bibliographies of included trials.

TRIALS

All trials in children or adults with stable asthma that compared the pressurised metered dose inhaler (with or without a spacer device) against any other hand held inhaler device containing the same beta(2) agonist.

RESULTS

84 randomised controlled trials were included. No differences were found between the pressurised metered dose inhaler and any other hand held inhaler device for lung function, blood pressure, symptoms, bronchial hyperreactivity, systemic bioavailability, inhaled steroid requirement, serum potassium concentration, and use of additional relief bronchodilators. In adults, pulse rate was lower in those using the pressurised metered dose inhaler compared with those using Turbohaler (standardised mean difference 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.84); patients preferred the pressurised metered dose inhaler to the Rotahaler (relative risk 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.78); hydrofluoroalkane pressurised metered dose inhalers reduced the requirement for rescue short course oral steroids (relative risk 0.67, 0.49 to 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

No evidence was found to show that alternative inhaler devices are more effective than standard pressurised metered dose inhalers for delivering acting beta(2 )agonist bronchodilators in asthma. Pressurised metered dose inhalers remain the most cost effective delivery devices.

Features of asthma in the elderly

Asthma has been considered a rare disease in the elderly, but recent studies have shown that it is as common in the elderly as in the middle-aged population. Diagnosis of asthma is often overlooked in older patients, leading to undertreatment. Spirometry, determination of expiratory flow lability, and histamine challenge tests are tools that are as usefulfor the evaluation of elderly asthmatics as they areforyoungerpatients. Asthma is more severe in the elderly, especially in long-standing asthmatics. Treatment of asthma in the elderly should follow the same stepwise guidelines that are recommended for all age groups, though it will require more intense monitoring. An aggressive treatment approach to mild and moderate asthma in young people is the best hope of changing the future trends of asthma in the elderly.

Cumulative and single-dose design to assess the bronchodilator effects of beta2-agonists in individuals with asthma

With the development of different chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-free metered dose aerosol and dry powder devices, it is necessary to study and validate the methods used for assessing and comparing their efficacy. This study evaluated the cumulative dose design by determining the bronchodilator response to salbutamol given according to either a high or a low cumulative dose regimen. Adults with asthma (n = 24) were studied in a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, cross-over design. On separate days, cumulative doses of salbutamol (50+50+100+200 or 100+100+ 200+400 or 400+0+0+0 or 0+0+0+0 microg) were given via Turbuhaler with 30 min between doses. The two cumulative dose regimens produced almost identical bronchodilator responses at each time point. The relative dose-potency between the 800- and 400- microg cumulative dose regimens was 0.7 with a 95% confidence interval of 0.5-1.0, excluding the true value of 2. The 400-microg cumulative dose regimen resulted in a higher FEV1 at 115 min than the 400-microg single-dose regimen. There was no difference in the bronchodilator response to the single dose of 50, 100, or 400 microg of salbutamol after either 5 or 25 min. Thus, care should be exercised when using either a cumulative or single-dose design for comparing different beta2-agonists, or different inhalation devices, with respect to their relative dose-potency. In addition, this study provides further evidence that for short-acting beta2-agonists such as salbutamol, lower doses than those normally recommended may be used, and that repeated self-administration of low doses over a period of 60 min may give a better bronchodilator response than a single administration of a high dose.

Salbutamol via Easyhaler is at least as effective as salbutamol via Turbuhaler in the treatment of histamine-induced bronchoconstriction

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and acceptability of salbutamol inhaled via Easyhaler and Turbuhaler multi-dose dry powder inhalers in the treatment of histamine-induced bronchoconstriction. Thirty-two adult patients with asthma and/or bronchial hyper-reactivity were included in the study, which was carried out according to a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, cross-over design. Histamine challenge test was performed on 2 study days separated by at least 7 days. The challenge test was continued until a > or = 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) was achieved. The patients then inhaled a single 100 microg dose of salbutamol from Easyhaler, or from Turbuhaler. FEV1 was assessed by flow-volume spirometry before and after histamine challenge and 1.5, 3, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 and 60 min after salbutamol inhalation. The primary efficacy variable was the maximum percentage change in FEV1 from the post-challenge value. The secondary efficacy variable was area under the curve (AUC) of FEV1. At the end of the study, acceptability of salbutamol Easyhaler was evaluated using a questionnaire and Easyhaler was also compared with the inhalation device the patient had used earlier. Twenty-six patients completed the study. Both salbutamol Easyhaler and salbutamol Turbuhaler produced a rapid and significant increase in FEV1, with maximum percentage changes being 43.9% (+/-15.3) and 40.5% (+/-21.9) from the post-challenge value, respectively. There were no significant differences between the two inhalation devices in terms of changes in FEV1 or AUC of FEV1. The use of Easyhaler and getting a new dose from Easyhaler was considered to be very easy by 65% and easy by 35% of the patients. None considered it difficult. Of 16 patients who had used Turbuhaler earlier, 19% considered Easyhaler much better, 44% better, and 38% the same as Turbuhaler, and none considered it worse. In conclusion, the results show that salbutamol Easyhaler was at least as effective as salbutamol Turbuhaler in the treatment of histamine-induced bronchoconstriction. In addition, the patients considered Easyhaler very easy or easy to use. The majority of patients who reported Turbuhaler as their own inhaler considered Easyhaler better or much better than Turbuhaler.

Can lung deposition data act as a surrogate for the clinical response to inhaled asthma drugs?

Studies involving the direct measurement of clinical response to inhaled asthma drugs, especially inhaled corticosteroids, may be very difficult to conduct. However, the deposition of drug in the lungs may be considered as a measure of local bioavailability, and may be quantified by radionuclide imaging techniques, or for some drugs by pharmacokinetic methods. This paper reviews evidence for considering lung deposition data as a surrogate for the clinical response to inhaled asthma drugs, based mainly upon a series of case histories. The appropriate use of lung deposition data in regulatory packages, especially to document the equivalence or comparability of two products, offers the possibility of significant time saving in the drug development process, and hence a faster drug development programme for inhaled asthma products.

Use of gamma scintigraphy to evaluate the performance of new inhalers

Many new inhaler devices and formulations involving pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI), dry powder inhaler (DPI), and liquid spray technologies are currently being developed. Some of these novel drug delivery products deposit a greater percentage of the drug dose in the lungs than a conventional chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-based pressurized aerosol, hence providing better drug targeting to the required site of drug action. The noninvasive imaging technique of gamma scintigraphy provides an accurate quantification of the amount of drug deposited in the lungs from inhaler devices together with an assessment of deposition in different lung regions. Respimat (Boehringer Ingelheim, Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany) is a novel liquid spray "soft mist inhaler" that more than doubles deposition in the lungs compared with a pMDI and reduces oropharyngeal deposition, thus providing a degree of drug targeting comparable to that from a spacer device. These data suggest that Respimat should be a valuable addition to the range of devices available for inhalation therapy.