The reproducibility of adenosine monophosphate bronchial challenges in mild, steroid-naive asthmatics

Assessing the Effects of Changing Patterns of Inhaled Corticosteroid Dosing and Adherence with Fluticasone Furoate and Budesonide on Asthma Management

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacological asthma management focuses on the use of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing therapies, which reduce airway inflammation and provide bronchoprotection, improving symptom control and reducing exacerbation risk. ICS underuse due to poor adherence is common, leading to poor clinical outcomes including increased risk of mortality. This article reviews efficacy versus systemic activity profiles for various adherence patterns and dosing regimens of fluticasone furoate (FF)-containing and budesonide (BUD)-containing asthma therapies in clinical trials and real-world studies.

METHODS

We performed a structured literature review (1 January 2000-3 March 2022) and mathematical modelling analysis of FF-containing and BUD-containing regular daily dosing in patients with mild-to-severe asthma, as-needed BUD/formoterol (FOR) in mild asthma, and BUD/FOR maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) dosing in moderate-to-severe asthma, to assess efficacy (bronchoprotection) and systemic activity (cortisol suppression) profiles of dosing patterns of ICS use in multiple adherence scenarios.

RESULTS

A total of 22 manuscripts were included in full-text review and 18 in the model simulations. Focusing on FF-containing or BUD-containing treatments at comparable adherence rates, regular daily FF or FF/vilanterol (VI) dosing provided more prolonged bronchoprotection and fewer systemic effects than daily BUD, daily BUD/FOR, or BUD/FOR MART dosing, especially in low adherence scenarios. In model simulations and the real-world setting, FF/VI generally provided longer bronchoprotection, lower systemic activity, and greater clinical benefits over BUD/FOR as well as consistently higher adherence.

CONCLUSION

In this literature review and modelling analysis, FF/VI was found to show clinical advantages on asthma control over BUD/FOR. These findings have implications for helping clinicians select the most suitable inhaled therapy for their patients with asthma.

Therapeutic index of inhaled corticosteroids in asthma: A dose-response comparison on airway hyperresponsiveness and adrenal axis suppression

Aims

To compare the airway potency, systemic activity and therapeutic index of three inhaled corticosteroids that differ in glucocorticoid receptor binding affinity, physicochemical and pharmacokinetic properties.

Methods

This escalating‐dose, placebo‐controlled, cross‐over study randomised adults with asthma to 1 or 2 treatment periods with ≥25 days washout in‐between. Each treatment period comprised five 7‐day dose escalations (μg/d): fluticasone furoate (FF; 25 → 100 → 200 → 400 → 800), fluticasone propionate (FP; 50 → 200 → 500 → 1000 → 2000), budesonide (BUD; 100 → 400 → 800 → 1600 → 3200) or placebo. Airway hyperresponsiveness to adenosine‐5'‐monophosphate (AMP PC₂₀) was assessed on day 8. Plasma cortisol was assessed on day 1 (predose baseline) and from pre‐PM dose on day 6 to pre‐PM dose day 7 (24‐h weighted mean).

Results

Fifty‐four subjects were randomised. FF showed greater airway potency than FP and BUD (AMP PC₂₀ dose at which 50% of the maximum effect is achieved [ED₅₀] values: 48.52, 1081.27 and 1467.36 μg/d, respectively). Systemic activity (cortisol suppression) ED₅₀ values were 899.99, 1986.05 and 1927.42 μg/d, respectively. The therapeutic index (ED₅₀ cortisol suppression/ED₅₀ AMP PC₂₀) was wider for FF (18.55) than FP (1.84) and BUD (1.31). FF 100 μg/d and 200 μg/d were both comparable in terms of airway potency with high doses of FP (≥1000 μg twice daily [BID]) and BUD (≥1500 μg/BID). The systemic activity of FF 100 μg/d and 200 μg/d (cortisol suppression: 7.41% and 14.28%, respectively) was comparable with low doses of FP (100 μg/BID and 250 μg/BID) and BUD (100 μg/BID and 200 μg/BID).

Conclusion

This study provides evidence that FF can provide more protection against airway hyperresponsiveness, with less systemic activity, than FP or BUD. This suggests that all inhaled corticosteroids are not therapeutically similar and may differ in their therapeutic index. (203162; NCT02991859).

Pharmacodynamic Studies to Demonstrate Bioequivalence of Oral Inhalation Products

In the session on "Pharmacodynamic studies to demonstrate efficacy and safety", presentations were made on methods of evaluating airway deposition of inhaled corticosteroids and bronchodilators, and systemic exposure indirectly using pharmacodynamic study designs. For inhaled corticosteroids, limitations of measuring exhaled nitric oxide and airway responsiveness to adenosine for anti-inflammatory effects were identified, whilst measurement of 18-h area under the cortisol concentration-time curve was recommended for determining equivalent systemic exposure. For bronchodilators, methacholine challenge was recommended as the most sensitive method of determining the relative amount of β-agonist or anti-muscarinic agent delivered to the airways. Whilst some agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), do not require measuring systemic effects when pharmacokinetic measurements are feasible, the European Medicines Agency requires measurement of heart rate and serum potassium, and some require serial electrocardiograms when bioequivalence is not established by pharmacokinetic (PK) studies. The Panel Discussion focused on whether PK would be the most sensitive marker of bioequivalence. Furthermore, there was much discussion about the FDA draft guidance for generic fluticasone propionate/salmeterol. The opinion was expressed that the study design is not capable of detecting a non-equivalent product and would require an unfeasibly large sample size.