Comparable efficacy of administration with face mask or mouthpiece of nebulized budesonide inhalation suspension for infants and young children with persistent asthma

Indian Guidelines on Nebulization Therapy

Inhalational therapy, today, happens to be the mainstay of treatment in obstructive airway diseases (OADs), such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is also in the present, used in a variety of other pulmonary and even non-pulmonary disorders. Hand-held inhalation devices may often be difficult to use, particularly for children, elderly, debilitated or distressed patients. Nebulization therapy emerges as a good option in these cases besides being useful in the home care, emergency room and critical care settings. With so many advancements taking place in nebulizer technology; availability of a plethora of drug formulations for its use, and the widening scope of this therapy; medical practitioners, respiratory therapists, and other health care personnel face the challenge of choosing appropriate inhalation devices and drug formulations, besides their rational application and use in different clinical situations. Adequate maintenance of nebulizer equipment including their disinfection and storage are the other relevant issues requiring guidance. Injudicious and improper use of nebulizers and their poor maintenance can sometimes lead to serious health hazards, nosocomial infections, transmission of infection, and other adverse outcomes. Thus, it is imperative to have a proper national guideline on nebulization practices to bridge the knowledge gaps amongst various health care personnel involved in this practice. It will also serve as an educational and scientific resource for healthcare professionals, as well as promote future research by identifying neglected and ignored areas in this field. Such comprehensive guidelines on this subject have not been available in the country and the only available proper international guidelines were released in 1997 which have not been updated for a noticeably long period of over two decades, though many changes and advancements have taken place in this technology in the recent past. Much of nebulization practices in the present may not be evidence-based and even some of these, the way they are currently used, may be ineffective or even harmful. Recognizing the knowledge deficit and paucity of guidelines on the usage of nebulizers in various settings such as inpatient, out-patient, emergency room, critical care, and domiciliary use in India in a wide variety of indications to standardize nebulization practices and to address many other related issues; National College of Chest Physicians (India), commissioned a National task force consisting of eminent experts in the field of Pulmonary Medicine from different backgrounds and different parts of the country to review the available evidence from the medical literature on the scientific principles and clinical practices of nebulization therapy and to formulate evidence-based guidelines on it. The guideline is based on all possible literature that could be explored with the best available evidence and incorporating expert opinions. To support the guideline with high-quality evidence, a systematic search of the electronic databases was performed to identify the relevant studies, position papers, consensus reports, and recommendations published. Rating of the level of the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation was done using the GRADE system. Six topics were identified, each given to one group of experts comprising of advisors, chairpersons, convenor and members, and such six groups (A-F) were formed and the consensus recommendations of each group was included as a section in the guidelines (Sections I to VI). The topics included were: A. Introduction, basic principles and technical aspects of nebulization, types of equipment, their choice, use, and maintenance B. Nebulization therapy in obstructive airway diseases C. Nebulization therapy in the intensive care unit D. Use of various drugs (other than bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids) by nebulized route and miscellaneous uses of nebulization therapy E. Domiciliary/Home/Maintenance nebulization therapy; public & health care workers education, and F. Nebulization therapy in COVID-19 pandemic and in patients of other contagious viral respiratory infections (included later considering the crisis created due to COVID-19 pandemic). Various issues in different sections have been discussed in the form of questions, followed by point-wise evidence statements based on the existing knowledge, and recommendations have been formulated.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

The emerging role of nebulization for maintenance treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at home

Inhalation therapy is the cornerstone of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) management. However, for many COPD patients who are managed at home, nebulization therapy offers an effective alternative treatment and fulfills the gap of catering to the specific population of patients who are unable to use handheld inhaler devices appropriately. The present review highlights key aspects, namely selection of the right beneficiaries for home nebulization, available drugs in nebulized formulations for the treatment of COPD, and the importance of care, cleaning, and maintenance, which are prerequisites for ensuring successful nebulization therapy.

Formulations for children: problems and solutions

Paediatric formulation design is complex as there is a need to understand the developmental physiological changes that occur during childhood and their impact on the absorption of drugs. Paediatric dose adjustments are usually based on achieving pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic profiles equivalent to those achieved in adult populations. However, differences in the way in which children handle adult products or the use of bespoke paediatric formulations can result in unexpected pharmacokinetic drug profiles with altered clinical efficacy. Differences in drug formulations need to be understood by healthcare professionals involved in the prescribing, administration or dispensing of drugs to children such that appropriate advice is given to ensure that therapeutic outcomes are achieved. This issue is not confined to oral medicines but is applicable for all routes of administration encountered in paediatric therapy.

Nebulizers for drug delivery to the lungs

INTRODUCTION

Nebulizers are the oldest modern method of delivering aerosols to the lungs for the purpose of respiratory drug delivery. While use of nebulizers remains widespread in the hospital and home setting, certain newer nebulization technologies have enabled more portable use. Varied fundamental processes of droplet formation and breakup are used in modern nebulizers, and these processes impact device performance and suitability for nebulization of various formulations.

AREAS COVERED

This review first describes basic aspects of nebulization technologies, including jet nebulizers, various high-frequency vibration techniques, and the use of colliding liquid jets. Nebulizer use in hospital and home settings is discussed next. Complications in aerosol droplet size measurement owing to the changes in nebulized droplet diameters due to evaporation or condensation are discussed, as is nebulization during mechanical ventilation.

EXPERT OPINION

While the limelight may often appear to be focused on other delivery devices, such as pressurized metered dose and dry powder inhalers, the ease of formulating many drugs in water and delivering them as aqueous aerosols ensures that nebulizers will remain as a viable and relevant method of respiratory drug delivery. This is particularly true given recent improvements in nebulizer droplet production technology.

Performance Comparisons of Jet and Mesh Nebulizers Using Different Interfaces in Simulated Spontaneously Breathing Adults and Children

BACKGROUND

Different types of nebulizers and interfaces are used for the treatment of adults and children with pulmonary diseases. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficiency of a mesh nebulizer (MN) with a proprietary adapter and a jet nebulizer (JN) under different configurations in adult and pediatric models of spontaneous breathing. We hypothesize that delivery efficiency of JN and MN will differ depending on the interface used during aerosol therapy in simulated spontaneously breathing adult and pediatric models. While we expect that aerosol delivery with JN will be less efficient than MN, we also hypothesize that lung deposition obtained with the adult lung model will be more than that with the pediatric lung model in all conditions tested in this study.

METHODS

A lung model using a teaching manikin connected to a sinusoidal pump via a collecting filter at the level of the bronchi simulating a spontaneously breathing adult (Vt 500 mL, RR 15 bpm, I:E ratio 1:2) or pediatric patient (Vt 150 mL, RR 25 bpm, I:E ratio 1:2). Albuterol sulfate (2.5 mg/3 mL) was aerosolized with JN (Mistymax 10, Airlife) or MN (Aerogen Solo(®), Aerogen) with the Adapter (Aerogen Solo(®) Adapter, Aerogen Ltd, Galway, Ireland) using mouthpiece, aerosol mask, and valved-mask in adults and the dragon mask, aerosol mask, and valved-mask in pediatrics (n=3). The Adapter, specifically designed for MN, was attached to all the interfaces used in this study with supplemental oxygen of 2 lpm, and in addition, the MP was tested with no additional flow in the adult model. The JN was driven with 10 lpm based on the manufacturer's label. Drug was eluted from the filter and analyzed via spectrophotometry. Descriptive statistics, dependent t-test and one-way analysis of variance were used for data analysis. Significant level was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

In adults, delivery efficiency of JN with the valved mask was significantly greater than that with the aerosol mask (p=0.01). Aerosol delivery of JN with the mouthpiece was not statistically significant from the valved mask (p=0.123) and the aerosol mask (p=0.193). Drug delivery with MN with mouthpiece (15.42±1.4%) and valved-mask (15.15±1.1%) was greater than the open aerosol mask (7.54±0.39%; p=0.0001) in the adult lung model. With no flow mouthpiece delivery increased>2 fold (34.9±3.1%; p=.0001) compared to use of 2 lpm of flow. Using the JN with the pediatric model deposition with valved-mask (5.3±0.8%), dragon mask (4.7±0.9%), and aerosol mask (4.1±0.3%) were similar (p>0.05); while drug delivery with MN via valved-mask (11.1±0.7%) was greater than the dragon mask (6.44±0.3%; p=0.002) and aerosol mask (4.6±0.4%; p=0.002), and the dragon mask was more efficient than the open aerosol mask (p=0.009) CONCLUSION: The type of nebulizer and interface used for aerosol therapy affects delivery efficiency in these simulated spontaneously breathing adult and pediatric models. Drug delivery was greatest with the valved-mouthpiece and mask with JN and MN, while the standard aerosol mask was least efficient in these simulated spontaneously breathing adult and pediatric lung models. Delivery efficiency of JN was less than MN in all conditions tested in this study except in the aerosol mask. Lung deposition obtained with the adult lung model was more than that with the pediatric lung model.

Asthma in children and adolescents: a comprehensive approach to diagnosis and management

Asthma is a chronic disease that has a significant impact on quality of life and is particularly important in children and adolescents, in part due to the higher incidence of allergies in children. The incidence of asthma has increased dramatically during this time period, with the highest increases in the urban areas of developed countries. It seems that the incidence in developing countries may follow this trend as well. While our knowledge of the pathophysiology of asthma and the available of newer, safer medication have both improved, the mortality of the disease has undergone an overall increase in the past 30 years. Asthma treatment goals in children include decreasing mortality and improving quality of life. Specific treatment goals include but are not limited to decreasing inflammation, improving lung function, decreasing clinical symptoms, reducing hospital stays and emergency department visits, reducing work or school absences, and reducing the need for rescue medications. Non-pharmacological management strategies include allergen avoidance, environmental evaluation for allergens and irritants, patient education, allergy testing, regular monitoring of lung function, and the use of asthma management plans, asthma control tests, peak flow meters, and asthma diaries. Achieving asthma treatment goals reduces direct and indirect costs of asthma and is economically cost-effective. Treatment in children presents unique challenges in diagnosis and management. Challenges in diagnosis include consideration of other diseases such as viral respiratory illnesses or vocal cord dysfunction. Challenges in management include evaluation of the child’s ability to use inhalers and peak flow meters and the management of exercise-induced asthma.

Guidelines for aerosol devices in infants, children and adults: which to choose, why and how to achieve effective aerosol therapy

Multiple types of aerosol devices are commonly used for the administration of medical aerosol therapy to patients with pulmonary diseases. All of these devices have been shown to be effective in trials where they are used correctly. However, failure to operate any of these devices properly has been associated with poor clinical response and limited patient adherence to therapy. Therefore, the selection of the best aerosol device for the individual patient is very important for optimizing the results of medical aerosol therapy. This article presents the rationale for selecting the most appropriate aerosol device to administer inhaled drugs in specific patient populations, with emphasis on patient-, drug-, device- and environment-related factors and with a comparison between the available devices. The following recommendations for the selection of the 'best' aerosol device for each patient population are intended to help clinicians gain a clear understanding of the specific issues and challenges so that they can optimize aerosol drug delivery and its therapeutic outcomes in patients.

Five-day course of budesonide inhalation suspension is as effective as oral prednisolone in the treatment of mild to severe acute asthma exacerbations in adults

BACKGROUND

Limited evidence is available on the use of budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) for the treatment of mild to severe acute asthma exacerbations (AAE) in adults in an inpatient setting. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of a five-day course of BIS compared with oral prednisolone (OP) in the management of adults with AAE.

METHODS

A retrospective study examined the response of 28 patients hospitalized with mild to severe acute asthma exacerbation from January 2003 to December 2003. These patients, who were steroid free ≥ 1 yr, were administered a five-day course of BIS (2 × 2 mg bid) or OP (2 × 15 mg bid). PEF, FEV(1) and asthma symptom scores were recorded daily.

RESULTS

The BIS (n = 13) and OP (n = 15) treatment groups were comparable at baseline for demographic characteristics and prebronchodilator (fenoterol) FEV(1) of 52.4% predicted normal value and 54.6% predicted normal value, respectively. Mean change of morning PEF was 152 L/min during BIS treatment and 130 L/min for OP treatment; the mean changes of morning forced expiratory volumes in 1 s (FEV(1)) were 1.0 and 0.7 L, respectively. The mean change in daytime symptom scores were -1.6 and -1.3 in the BIS and the OP groups, respectively. Improvements in PEF, FEV(1) and daytime symptom scores were significantly different between baseline and after treatment in each treatment group (p < 0.05). However, improvements in both BIS and OP groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

Budesonide inhalation suspension may be an alternative treatment of acute asthma exacerbation in adults who are at risk for systemic corticosteroids.

Aerosol therapy in infants and toddlers: past, present and future

Infants and toddlers are a unique subpopulation with regard to aerosol therapy. There are various anatomical, physiological and emotional factors peculiar to this age group that present significant difficulties and challenges for aerosol delivery. Most studies on the factors determining lung deposition of therapeutic aerosols are based on data from adults or older children, which cannot simply be extrapolated directly to infants. The present review describes why infants/toddlers are very different with respect to two major issues - namely their anatomy/physiology and their behavior. We suggest possible solutions and future research directions aimed at improving clinical outcomes of aerosol therapy in this age group.

Episodic use of an inhaled corticosteroid or leukotriene receptor antagonist in preschool children with moderate-to-severe intermittent wheezing

BACKGROUND

Acute wheezing illnesses in preschoolers require better management strategies to reduce morbidity.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to examine the effectiveness of episodic use of an inhaled corticosteroid and a leukotriene receptor antagonist in preschoolers with intermittent wheezing.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 12-month trial, 238 children aged 12 to 59 months with moderate-to-severe intermittent wheezing received 7 days of either budesonide inhalation suspension (1 mg twice daily), montelukast (4 mg daily), or placebo in addition to albuterol with each identified respiratory tract illness (RTI). Proportion of episode-free days (EFDs) during the 12-month trial was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

The 3 treatment groups did not differ in proportions of EFDs, with adjusted mean EFDs of 76% (95% CI, 70% to 81%) for budesonide, 73% (95% CI, 66% to 79%) for montelukast, and 74% (95% CI, 65% to 81%) for conventional therapy (P = .66). The 3 groups did not differ in oral corticosteroid use, health care use, quality of life, or linear growth. However, during RTIs, budesonide and montelukast therapy led to modest reductions in trouble breathing (38% [P = .003] and 37% [P = .003], respectively) and interference with activity scores (32% [P = .01] and 40% [P = .001], respectively) that were most evident in those with positive asthma predictive indices.

CONCLUSIONS

In preschool children with moderate-to-severe intermittent wheezing, episodic use of either budesonide or montelukast early in RTIs, when added to albuterol, did not increase the proportion of EFDs or decrease oral corticosteroid use over a 12-month period. However, indicators of severity of acute illnesses were reduced, particularly in children with positive asthma predictive indices.

Improved Efficiency of Budesonide Nebulization Using Surface-Active Agents

Our aim was to improve the efficiency of nebulised budesonide using surface-active agents. Cationic, anionic, and nonionic detergents were added to commercial budesonide suspension, and the particle size distribution during nebulization was measured using both cascade impaction and laser diffraction. Our results showed that the emitted dose was increased after addition of cationic (p < 0.001) and nonionic detergents (p < 0.01) compared with the commercial formulation alone. The respirable fraction was increased for all detergent formulations (p < 0.001) compared with the commercial formulation. We concluded that cationic and nonionic detergent increased the total output of budesonide from the Sidestream. All detergent formulations increased the respirable fraction of nebulized budesonide.

[Nebulized corticosteroids and pediatricians: results of the NUAGES survey]

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to analyze the data of the NUAGES survey (a survey on the practice of nebulization in France), concerning the prescriptions of nebulized steroids from 514 pediatricians.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The reason why nebulization was chosen as a delivery route, the diseases motivating the prescription, the age of the patients, the kind of drug used, and the prescription and device modalities were studied.

RESULTS

Efficacy in treating various respiratory diseases was the main reason cited for using nebulization, in particular severe persistent asthma (76%). Pediatricians prescribed nebulization mainly to infants (60%). The most frequently used drug was budesonide suspension (89%), but the intravenous route for steroids (18%) and drug admixtures (62%) were also proposed by nebulization. A specific prescription for the nebulizer was given in 75% of the cases, with the type of interface to use specified in 66%.

DISCUSSION

Pediatricians consider that nebulization is well adapted to young children. Although the proper steroid is usually chosen, unfortunately, it is often prescribed with other drugs, with 1 prescription out of 4 not following the recommendations. Prescription of the device is not optimal and may compromise the efficacy of the treatment.

CONCLUSION

Nebulization is a potential mode of delivery for steroids that is difficult to prescribe and warrants improved pediatrician training.

Paediatric pulmonary drug delivery: considerations in asthma treatment

Aerosol therapy, the preferred route of administration for glucocorticosteroids and short-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonists in the treatment of paediatric asthma, may be given via nebulisers, metered-dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers. For glucocorticosteroids, therapy with aerosolised medication results in higher concentrations of drug at the target organ with minimal systemic side effects compared with oral treatments. The dose of drug that reaches the airways in children with asthma is dependent on both the delivery device and patient-related factors. Factors that affect aerosol drug delivery are reviewed briefly. Advantages and disadvantages of each device and device-specific factors that influence patient preferences are examined. Although age-based device recommendations have been made, the optimal choice for drug delivery is the one that the patient or caregiver prefers to use, can use correctly and is most likely to use consistently.

Budesonide inhalation suspension for the treatment of asthma in infants and children

On the basis of the well recognised role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of asthma, anti-inflammatory therapy, in the form of inhaled corticosteroids, has become the mainstay of treatment in patients with persistent asthma. Budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) is a nonhalogenated corticosteroid with a high ratio of local anti-inflammatory activity to systemic activity. Furthermore, BIS is approved in >70 countries for the maintenance treatment of bronchial asthma in both paediatric and adult patients (approval is limited to paediatric patients in the US and France).Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials conducted in >1000 children have demonstrated the efficacy of BIS in children with persistent asthma of varying degrees of severity. In children frequently hospitalised with uncontrolled asthma, initiation of BIS therapy can reduce the need for emergency intervention. Moreover, limited data suggest that BIS is effective for the treatment of acute exacerbations of asthma in children and may reduce the need for short courses of oral corticosteroids.BIS is well tolerated in children, with an adverse event profile similar to that of placebo, and no clinically relevant changes in adrenal function have been demonstrated during the course of short- and long-term (1-year) studies. Small but statistically significant reductions in growth velocity have been demonstrated with BIS over 1 year of treatment. However, available evidence suggests that growth effects are transient in children receiving budesonide and that these children eventually achieve full adult height.

Factors guiding the choice of delivery device for inhaled corticosteroids in the long-term management of stable asthma and COPD: focus on budesonide

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) have become the mainstay of chronic controller therapy to treat airways inflammation in asthma and to reduce exacerbations in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An array of ICSs are now available that are aerosolized by a range of delivery systems. Such devices include pressurized (or propellant) metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), pMDIs plus valved holding chambers or spacers, breath-actuated inhalers, and nebulizers. More recently, dry-powder inhalers (DPIs) were developed to help overcome problems of hand-breath coordination associated with pMDIs. The clinical benefit of ICSs therapy is determined by a complex interplay between the nature and severity of the disease, the type of drug and its formulation, and characteristics of the delivery device together with the patient's ability to use the device correctly. The ICSs budesonide is available by pMDI, DPI, and nebulizer-allowing the physician to select the best device for each individual patient. Indeed, the availability of budesonide in three different delivery systems allows versatility for the prescribing physician and provides continuity of drug therapy for younger patients who may remain on the same ICSs as they mature.

Inhaled steroid delivery from small-volume holding chambers depends on age, holding chamber, and interface in children

The relationship between the amount of inhaled steroids delivered from pressurized metered-dose inhalers used with their recommended holding chambers and age of the patients using these devices was studied in an open randomised cross-over filter study. We recruited 1-2-month-old healthy infants (n = 21), 2-3-year-old asthmatics (n = 13), 4-6-year-old asthmatics (n = 15), and 10-15-year-old asthmatics (n = 20). Each child inhaled two puffs, administered by a single investigator, of both budesonide through Nebuchamber and fluticasone propionate through Babyhaler, on two occasions. Moreover, the 4-6-year-old group inhaled via both facemask and mouthpiece. Drug, collected on a filter interposed between holding chamber and patient, was analysed by high performance liquid chromatography. Filter dose, expressed in percent of the nominal dose, was analysed in a mixed effect linear regression model with age group, holding chamber and inhalation interface (facemask or mouthpiece) as fixed effects and subject as random effect. Filter dose from both holding chambers increased significantly with age, from 3% with Babyhaler and 7% with Nebuchamber in the youngest children, to 40-41% with both holding chambers in adolescents. Nebuchamber delivered more drug than Babyhaler (p = 0.002), but variability in drug delivery (about 11%) was similar between holding chambers. Filter dose decreased from 35% to 22% with Babyhaler, and from 42% to 27% with Nebuchamber when using a mouthpiece rather than a facemask (p < 0.0001). Delivery of inhaled steroids used with their recommended holding chambers depends from age and holding chamber, but also from the inhalation interface. Lung deposition and clinical studies comparing inhalation from holding chambers with mouthpiece and facemask are urgently required.

Optimizing inhaled corticosteroid therapy in children with chronic asthma

Asthma is the most common chronic illness among children, and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the most effective long-term therapy available for suppressing airway inflammation in persistent asthma. While the primary aim of ICS therapy is good efficacy with minimal side effects, early diagnosis and treatment of asthma can also improve asthma control and normalize lung function, and may prevent irreversible airway injury. Poor patient compliance is a major barrier to treatment. Simplified dosing regimens (e.g., once-daily administration), good inhaler technique, and education of the patient/caregiver should improve patient compliance. Concerns over ICS therapy are often based on the potential for systemic effects associated with oral corticosteroids (e.g., effects on bone mineral density, or growth suppression in children). Since adverse events are associated with high doses of ICS, the dose in all patients should be titrated to the minimum effective dose required to maintain control. Optimal distribution of an ICS in the lungs rather than the systemic compartment is affected by several factors, including the drug's pharmacokinetic profile, inhaler type, inhaler technique, and drug particle size. For young patients unable to use a dry-powder inhaler or pressurized metered-dose inhaler, a nebulizer facilitates drug delivery through passive inhalation; ICS therapy in the form of budesonide inhalation suspension can be given to children with persistent asthma from 12 months of age. In conclusion, selecting a drug with good efficacy and minimal side effects, such as budesonide, together with an easy-to-use delivery system and ongoing patient/caregiver education, is important in optimizing ICS therapy for children with persistent asthma.

The use of inhaled corticosteroids for persistent asthma in infants and young children

OBJECTIVE

To review pediatric trials of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy and summarize data on the pediatric use of devices to facilitate delivery of ICSs.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant articles regarding ICS treatment of persistent asthma in children younger than 5 years were identified from MEDLINE and reference lists of review articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Key articles were selected by the authors.

RESULTS

Clinical trials from the United States and Europe consistently demonstrated that ICS therapy is the most favorable treatment option with regard to safety and efficacy for infants and young children with persistent asthma. This contention is supported by numerous trials of budesonide inhalation suspension in children ranging from 6 months through 8 years of age and data from older children treated with fluticasone propionate.

CONCLUSIONS

As the only corticosteroid available in the United States as a nebulized formulation and the only ICS product extensively studied in young children and infants, budesonideinhalation suspension is an appropriate first-line therapy for treatment of persistent asthma in this population.

Nebuliser hood compared to mask in wheezy infants: aerosol therapy without tears!

BACKGROUND

Small volume nebulisers (SVNs) with masks commonly provide aerosol therapy for infants with lung diseases. However, infants and toddlers are often disturbed by and thus reject masks.

AIMS

To compare the lung deposition efficiency of the "usual" SVN aerosol mask and a prototype hood attached to an SVN. The advantage of the hood is that no mask is needed and medication can readily be administered during sleep.

METHODS

99mTc salbutamol solution was administered at random by SVN plus mask or hood to 14 wheezy infants (mean age 8 (SD 5) months). The dose and distribution of salbutamol were evaluated using gamma scintigraphy. Clinical response, tolerability by the infants, and parent preference were also compared.

RESULTS

Mean total lung deposition was 2.6% with the hood and 2.4% with the mask (p > 0.05). Variability with the mask was greater than with the hood (coefficient of variation (CoV) 54% v 39%). Both treatments provided similar clinical benefit and side effects as reflected in improved oxygen saturation, reduced respiratory frequency, and increased heart rate. Infants accepted the hood better than the mask and there was a positive correlation between poor acceptance and upper airways and stomach deposition for both treatment modalities. Parents preferred the hood treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Aerosol therapy by hood is as efficient as by mask but provides a better therapeutic index. It is much better tolerated by infants and preferred by parents. Hood nebulisation is a simple and patient friendly mode of aerosol therapy in wheezy infants.

A review of once-daily delivery of anti-asthmatic drugs in children

Determining which drug is suitable for, and which patient can benefit from, a once-daily dose of prophylactic treatment is important for practitioners who want to improve therapeutic compliance in children with asthma. According to the literature, once-daily delivery of cromolyn sodium, nedocromil or beclomethasone dipropionate must be avoided. On the other hand, switching from a twice-daily to a once-daily regimen is efficient and safe only in children with well-controlled asthma using nebulized or dry-powder budesonide, dry-powder fluticasone propionate, flunisolide, or sustained-release theophylline. Such information is not available for long-acting beta2-agonists, except for oral bambuterol. Initiating a once-daily treatment in previously untreated children can only be based on low doses of inhaled budesonide or on an oral drug, montelukast. Further studies in children with severe asthma or treated with metered-dose inhalers and spacer devices are required before recommending a once-daily drug delivery in such situations.

Budesonide inhalation suspension: a nebulized corticosteroid for persistent asthma

Guidelines for managing asthma in pediatric patients published by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend the use of inhaled corticosteroids for the management of persistent asthma in infants and young children. When these guidelines were published, pressurized metered-dose inhalers and dry-powder inhalers were the only delivery devices available for inhaled corticosteroids in the United States. These devices can be difficult for young children to use correctly. Furthermore, no inhaled corticosteroid was approved in the United States for the treatment of children younger than 4 years. Budesonide inhalation suspension (Pulmicort Respules; AstraZeneca LP, Wilmington, Del) was developed to meet the medication delivery needs of infants and young children with persistent asthma. Pulmicort Respules is the first inhaled corticosteroid approved for administration by means of a nebulizer and the only inhaled corticosteroid approved in the United States for infants as young as 12 months. Budesonide has been studied extensively worldwide. In the United States the tolerability and efficacy of budesonide inhalation suspension were confirmed in 3 placebo-controlled multicenter trials. These studies demonstrated that both once- and twice-daily dosing of budesonide inhalation suspension (0.25-1 mg) improved pulmonary function and ameliorated asthma symptoms in infants and young children with persistent asthma. Budesonide inhalation suspension was well tolerated, and the incidences of reported adverse events were similar among patients in the budesonide, placebo, and conventional asthma therapy groups. This article reviews the results of these studies, as well as the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and clinical use of budesonide inhalation suspension.

Role of budesonide inhalation suspension in children with asthma

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) in the treatment of children with asthma.

DATA SOURCES

Literature identified through Medline (1966-November 2000) and references obtained from selected articles. Search terms included budesonide and asthma.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory disease that affects approximately 4.8 million children in the US. By reducing inflammation, corticosteroids decrease symptoms and improve lung function. As the first nebulized corticosteroid, BIS offers an important treatment option for children with persistent asthma.

CONCLUSIONS

BIS is effective in reducing symptoms and improving lung function in children with asthma. It should be used in children ages 1-8 years with moderate to severe persistent asthma who are unable to effectively use a metered-dose inhaler with or without a spacer or a dry-powder inhaler.

Once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension in infants and children < 4 and > or = 4 years of age with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

Budesonide inhalation suspension (Pulmicort Respules; AstraZeneca LP, Wilmington, DE), a nebulized corticosteroid, was developed for use in infants and young children with persistent asthma.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension in children < 4 years of age and in those > or = 4 years of age with persistent asthma.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis stratified by age group was performed on data from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of budesonide inhalation suspension 0.25 mg, 0.5 mg, or 1.0 mg once daily for 12 weeks in children 6 months to 8 years of age with persistent asthma. Clinical assessments included nighttime and daytime asthma symptoms, breakthrough medication use, adverse events, and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis function.

RESULTS

In both randomized studies, budesonide inhalation suspension demonstrated statistically significant improvement in nighttime and daytime asthma symptom scores compared with placebo. In the retrospective analysis of pooled data from these studies, the efficacy of budesonide was maintained when children were stratified by age group. Clinical improvements from baseline in nighttime and daytime asthma symptom scores were observed in both age groups at all budesonide inhalation suspension dose levels. No significant differences were observed between age groups in breakthrough medication use in any of the treatment groups. No differences were observed in the incidence of adverse events between the two age groups, and significant (P < 0.01) effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis function was apparent only in children < 4 years of age at the 0.25-mg dose level.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension is effective in the treatment of persistent asthma in children aged < 4 and > or = 4 years of age.

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.

A review of budesonide inhalation suspension in the treatment of pediatric asthma

Asthma is recognized as an inflammatory disease, and inhaled corticosteroids are the mainstay of treatment in patients with persistent disease. Until recently, no inhaled corticosteroid was approved in the United States for children aged 4 years and younger, and no practical dosage form was available for infants and young children unable to use metered-dose inhalers effectively. Budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) is a glucocorticoid with high topical and low systemic activity. In children aged 12 months-8 years, BIS improves asthma symptoms and lung function and decreases the need for breakthrough bronchodilators. Long-term follow-up studies in children concluded that BIS is well tolerated, with little or no effect on growth and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function. Thus it is a valuable therapeutic alternative to systemic corticosteroid therapy in infants and young children.

Budesonide Inhalation Suspension

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary® Monograph Service receive five to six researched monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late Phase III trials. The monographs are targeted to your Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee. Subscribers also receive monthly one-page summary monographs on the agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing in-services. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation (DUE) is also provided each month. The monographs are published in printed form and on diskettes that allow customization. Subscribers to the The Formulary Monograph Service also receive access to a pharmacy bulletin board called The Formulary Information Exchange (The F.I.X). All topics pertinent to clinical pharmacy are discussed on The F.I.X.

Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. If you would like information about The Formulary Monograph Service or The F.I.X., call The Formulary at 800-322-4349. The February 2001 Formulary monographs are iron sucrose injection, oxybate sodium, diclofenac sodium gel, tacrolimus ointment, and docosanol. The DUE is on iron sucrose injection.

Budesonide inhalation suspension: a review of its use in infants, children and adults with inflammatory respiratory disorders

Budesonide, a topically active corticosteroid, has a broad spectrum of clinically significant local anti-inflammatory effects in patients with inflammatory lung diseases including persistent asthma. In infants and young children with persistent asthma, day- and night-time symptom scores, and the number of days in which beta2-agonist bronchodilators were required, were significantly lower during randomised, double-blind treatment with budesonide inhalation suspension 0.5 to 2 mg/day than placebo in 3 multicentre trials. Significantly fewer children discontinued therapy with budesonide inhalation suspension than with placebo because of worsening asthma symptoms in a study that included children who were receiving inhaled corticosteroids at baseline. Recent evidence indicates that budesonide inhalation suspension is significantly more effective than nebulised sodium cromoglycate in improving control of asthma in young children with persistent asthma. At a dosage of 2 mg/day, budesonide inhalation suspension significantly reduced the number of asthma exacerbations and requirements for systemic corticosteroids in preschool children with severe persistent asthma. In children with acute asthma or wheezing, the preparation was as effective as, or more effective than oral prednisolone in improving symptoms. In children with croup, single 2 or 4mg dosages of budesonide inhalation suspension were significantly more effective than placebo and as effective as oral dexamethasone 0.6 mg/kg or nebulised L-epinephrine (adrenaline) 4mg in alleviating croup symptoms and preventing or reducing the duration of hospitalisation. Early initiation of therapy with budesonide inhalation suspension 1 mg/day appears to reduce the need for mechanical ventilation and decrease overall corticosteroid usage in preterm very low birthweight infants at risk for chronic lung disease. In adults with persistent asthma, budesonide inhalation suspension < or =8 mg/day has been compared with inhaled budesonide 1.6 mg/day and fluticasone propionate 2 mg/day administered by metered dose inhaler. Greater improvements in asthma control occurred in patients during treatment with budesonide inhalation suspension than with budesonide via metered dose inhaler, whereas fluticasone propionate produced greater increases in morning peak expiratory flow rates than nebulised budesonide. Several small studies suggest that the preparation has an oral corticosteroid-sparing effect in adults with persistent asthma and that it may be as effective as oral corticosteroids during acute exacerbations of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The frequency of adverse events was similar in children receiving budesonide inhalation suspension 0.25 to 2 mg/day or placebo in 12-week studies. During treatment with budesonide inhalation suspension 0.5 to 1 mg/day in 3 nonblind 52-week studies, growth velocity in children was generally unaffected; however, a small but statistically significant decrease in growth velocity was detected in children who were not using inhaled corticosteroids prior to the introduction of budesonide inhalation suspension. Hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function was not affected by short (12 weeks) or long (52 weeks) term treatment with nebulised budesonide. In conclusion, budesonide inhalation suspension is the most widely available nebulised corticosteroid, and in the US is the only inhaled corticosteroid indicated in children aged > or =1 year with persistent asthma. The preparation is suitable for use in infants, children and adults with persistent asthma and in infants and children with croup.