Inhaled steroid/long-acting beta 2 agonist combination products provide 24 hours improvement in lung function in adult asthmatic patients

Correlation between asthmatic infants with rickets and vitamin D, inflammatory factors and immunoglobulin E

Correlation between asthmatic infants with rickets and vitamin D, inflammatory factors and immunoglobulin was investigated. A total of 60 child patients with asthma who met the inclusion criteria and received treatment from January 2016 to October 2017 were collected. Among them, 17 asthmatic infants with rickets were set as observation group, while 43 child patients with simple asthma were regarded as the control group. Venous blood was drawn from the two groups of subjects after admission. The levels of interleukin-1 (IL-1), IL-6 and IL-17 in serum were determined by ELISA, vitamin D and immunoglobulin E levels in serum were detected using a fully-automatic biochemical analyzer, and wheezing duration during asthma attack was recorded. IL-1, IL-6, IL-17 and immunoglobulin E levels in serum of observation group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P<0.05). The vitamin D level in the observation group was remarkably lower than that in the control group (P<0.05). Wheezing duration in observation group was evidently longer than that in control group (P<0.05). Moreover, IL-1, IL-6, IL-17 and immunoglobulin E levels in serum were positively related to wheezing duration, but the vitamin D level was negatively associated with wheezing duration. Infantile asthma with rickets is closely correlated with vitamin D, inflammatory factors and immunoglobulin E, which are major risk factors in infantile asthma with rickets.

Inhaled steroids with and without regular formoterol for asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between beta₂-agonists and increases in asthma mortality. There has been much debate about whether regular (daily) long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABA) are safe when used in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). This updated Cochrane Review includes results from two large trials that recruited 23,422 adolescents and adults mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events (SAEs) in trials that randomly assign participants with chronic asthma to regular formoterol and inhaled corticosteroids versus the same dose of inhaled corticosteroid alone.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised trials using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. We checked websites of clinical trial registers for unpublished trial data as well as FDA submissions in relation to formoterol. The date of the most recent search was February 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials (RCTs) with a parallel design involving adults, children, or both with asthma of any severity who received regular formoterol and ICS (separate or combined) treatment versus the same dose of ICS for at least 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We obtained unpublished data on mortality and SAEs from the sponsors of the studies. We assessed our confidence in the evidence using GRADE recommendations. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and all-cause non-fatal serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 42 studies eligible for inclusion and included 39 studies in the analyses: 29 studies included 35,751 adults, and 10 studies included 4035 children and adolescents. Inhaled corticosteroids included beclomethasone (daily metered dosage 200 to 800 µg), budesonide (200 to 1600 µg), fluticasone (200 to 250 µg), and mometasone (200 to 800 µg). Formoterol metered dosage ranged from 12 to 48 µg daily. Fixed combination ICS was used in most of the studies. We judged the risk of selection bias, performance bias, and attrition bias as low, however most studies did not report independent assessment of causation of SAEs.DeathsSeventeen of 18,645 adults taking formoterol and ICS and 13 of 17,106 adults taking regular ICS died of any cause. The pooled Peto odds ratio (OR) was 1.25 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 2.56, moderate-certainty evidence), which equated to one death occurring for every 1000 adults treated with ICS alone for 26 weeks; the corresponding risk amongst adults taking formoterol and ICS was also one death (95% CI 0 to 2 deaths). No deaths were reported in the trials on children and adolescents (4035 participants) (low-certainty evidence).In terms of asthma-related deaths, no children and adolescents died from asthma, but three of 12,777 adults in the formoterol and ICS treatment group died of asthma (both low-certainty evidence).Non-fatal serious adverse eventsA total of 401 adults experienced a non-fatal SAE of any cause on formoterol with ICS, compared to 369 adults who received regular ICS. The pooled Peto OR was 1.00 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.16, high-certainty evidence, 29 studies, 35,751 adults). For every 1000 adults treated with ICS alone for 26 weeks, 22 adults had an SAE; the corresponding risk for those on formoterol and ICS was also 22 adults (95% CI 19 to 25).Thirty of 2491 children and adolescents experienced an SAE of any cause when receiving formoterol with ICS, compared to 13 of 1544 children and adolescents receiving ICS alone. The pooled Peto OR was 1.33 (95% CI 0.71 to 2.49, moderate-certainty evidence, 10 studies, 4035 children and adolescents). For every 1000 children and adolescents treated with ICS alone for 12.5 weeks, 8 had an non-fatal SAE; the corresponding risk amongst those on formoterol and ICS was 11 children and adolescents (95% CI 6 to 21).Asthma-related serious adverse eventsNinety adults experienced an asthma-related non-fatal SAE with formoterol and ICS, compared to 102 with ICS alone. The pooled Peto OR was 0.86 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.14, moderate-certainty evidence, 28 studies, 35,158 adults). For every 1000 adults treated with ICS alone for 26 weeks, 6 adults had an asthma-related non-fatal SAE; the corresponding risk for those on formoterol and ICS was 5 adults (95% CI 4 to 7).Amongst children and adolescents, 9 experienced an asthma-related non-fatal SAE with formoterol and ICS, compared to 5 on ICS alone. The pooled Peto OR was 1.18 (95% CI 0.40 to 3.51, very low-certainty evidence, 10 studies, 4035 children and adolescents). For every 1000 children and adolescents treated with ICS alone for 12.5 weeks, 3 had an asthma-related non-fatal SAE; the corresponding risk on formoterol and ICS was 4 (95% CI 1 to 11).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a difference in the risk of death (all-cause or asthma-related) in adults taking combined formoterol and ICS versus ICS alone (moderate- to low-certainty evidence). No deaths were reported in children and adolescents. The risk of dying when taking either treatment was very low, but we cannot be certain if there is a difference in mortality when taking additional formoterol to ICS (low-certainty evidence).We did not find a difference in the risk of non-fatal SAEs of any cause in adults (high-certainty evidence). A previous version of the review had shown a lower risk of asthma-related SAEs in adults taking combined formoterol and ICS; however, inclusion of new studies no longer shows a difference between treatments (moderate-certainty evidence).The reported number of children and adolescents with SAEs was small, so uncertainty remains in this age group.We included results from large studies mandated by the FDA. Clinical decisions and information provided to patients regarding regular use of formoterol and ICS need to take into account the balance between known symptomatic benefits of formoterol and ICS versus the remaining degree of uncertainty associated with its potential harmful effects.

Inhaled steroids with and without regular salmeterol for asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between use of beta₂-agonists and increased asthma mortality. Much debate has surrounded possible causal links for this association, and whether regular (daily) long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABAs) are safe, particularly when used in combination with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). This is an update of a Cochrane Review that now includes data from two large trials including 11,679 adults and 6208 children; both were mandated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).  OBJECTIVES: To assess risks of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events (SAEs) in trials that randomised participants with chronic asthma to regular salmeterol and ICS versus the same dose of ICS.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised trials using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. We checked websites of clinical trials registers for unpublished trial data. We also checked FDA submissions in relation to salmeterol. The date of the most recent search was 10 October 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel-design randomised trials involving adults, children, or both with asthma of any severity who were randomised to treatment with regular salmeterol and ICS (in separate or combined inhalers) versus the same dose of ICS of at least 12 weeks in duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted the review according to standard procedures expected by Cochrane. We obtained unpublished data on mortality and SAEs from the sponsors, from ClinicalTrials.gov, and from FDA submissions. We assessed our confidence in the evidence according to current GRADE recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We have included in this review 41 studies (27,951 participants) in adults and adolescents, along with eight studies (8453 participants) in children. We judged that the overall risk of bias was low for all-cause events, and we obtained data on SAEs from all study authors. All except 542 adults (and none of the children) were given salmeterol and fluticasone in the same (combination) inhaler.DeathsEleven of a total of 14,233 adults taking regular salmeterol and ICS died, as did 13 of 13,718 taking regular ICS at the same dose. The pooled Peto odds ratio (OR) was 0.80 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 1.78; participants = 27,951; studies = 41; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). In other words, for every 1000 adults treated for 25 weeks, one death occurred among those on ICS alone, and the corresponding risk among those taking salmeterol and ICS was also one death (95% CI 0 to 2 deaths).No children died, and no adults or children died of asthma, so we remain uncertain about mortality in children and about asthma mortality in any age group.Non-fatal serious adverse eventsA total of 332 adults receiving regular salmeterol with ICS experienced a non-fatal SAE of any cause, compared to 282 adults receiving regular ICS. The pooled Peto OR was 1.14 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.33; participants = 27,951; studies = 41; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). For every 1000 adults treated for 25 weeks, 21 adults on ICS alone had an SAE, and the corresponding risk for those on salmeterol and ICS was 23 adults (95% CI 20 to 27).Sixty-five of 4229 children given regular salmeterol with ICS suffered an SAE of any cause, compared to 62 of 4224 children given regular ICS. The pooled Peto OR was 1.04 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.48; participants = 8453; studies = 8; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). For every 1000 children treated for 23 weeks, 15 children on ICS alone had an SAE, and the corresponding risk for those on salmeterol and ICS was 15 children (95% CI 11 to 22).Asthma-related serious adverse eventsEighty and 67 adults in each group, respectively, experienced an asthma-related non-fatal SAE. The pooled Peto OR was 1.15 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.59; participants = 27,951; studies = 41; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). For every 1000 adults treated for 25 weeks, five receiving ICS alone had an asthma-related SAE, and the corresponding risk among those on salmeterol and ICS was six adults (95% CI 4 to 8).Twenty-nine children taking salmeterol and ICS and 23 children taking ICS alone reported asthma-related events. The pooled Peto OR was 1.25 (95% CI 0.72 to 2.16; participants = 8453; studies = 8; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). For every 1000 children treated for 23 weeks, five receiving an ICS alone had an asthma-related SAE, and the corresponding risk among those receiving salmeterol and ICS was seven children (95% CI 4 to 12).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We did not find a difference in the risk of death or serious adverse events in either adults or children. However, trial authors reported no asthma deaths among 27,951 adults or 8453 children randomised to regular salmeterol and ICS or ICS alone over an average of six months. Therefore, the risk of dying from asthma on either treatment was very low, but we remain uncertain about whether the risk of dying from asthma is altered by adding salmeterol to ICS.Inclusion of new trials has increased the precision of the estimates for non-fatal SAEs of any cause. We can now say that the worst-case estimate is that at least 152 adults and 139 children must be treated with combination salmeterol and ICS for six months for one additional person to be admitted to the hospital (compared to treatment with ICS alone). These possible risks still have to be weighed against the benefits experienced by people who take combination treatment.However more than 90% of prescribed treatment was taken in the new trials, so the effects observed may be different from those seen with salmeterol in combination with ICS in daily practice.

Cardiovascular safety of long acting beta agonist-inhaled corticosteroid combination products in adult patients with asthma: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Long-acting beta agonists and inhaled corticosteroids combination products (LABA-ICS) are widely used in the treatment of asthma. However, there appears to be little data on their cardiovascular safety. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the available studies and trials on the cardiovascular safety of LABA-ICS in adults with asthma.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers screened citations from PubMed and National Clinical Trials registry to identify studies and trials on the cardiovascular effects of LABA-ICS in patients with asthma.

RESULTS

A total of 15 studies (with 17 cohorts on LABA-ICS to compare with a comparator or placebo) with 5,440 total study participants met the inclusion criteria. Two studies on budesonide-formoterol and one on fluticasone-salmeterol reported treatment emergent cardiovascular adverse events, all of which were dysrhythmias. For comparison, the pooled estimate of the Peto odds ratio (0.72; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.17-3; p = 0.65) and the summary risk ratio (0.77; 95 % CI 0.26-2.3; p = 0.64) indicated a nonsignificant difference between LABA-ICS and comparator/placebo groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review found that few studies and trials reported treatment emergent cardiovascular adverse events with LABA-ICS. However, the Peto odds ratio and risk ratio for these outcomes was statistically nonsignificant. This suggests that LABA-ICS products may have a safe cardiovascular profile in asthma patients.

Effects of two inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta-agonist combinations on small-airway dysfunction in mild asthmatics measured by impulse oscillometry

Background

We previously showed that the long-acting beta agonist (LABA) salmeterol as inhalation powder or metered-dose inhaler improves lung-function parameters assessed by impulse oscillometry (IOS) in 2- to 5-year-old children with reversible-airway disease within 15 minutes.

Objective

We studied 12- to 45-year-olds with mild persistent asthma in order to compare the onset and extent of peripheral airway effects following the first dose and after 4 weeks dosing with two inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/LABA combinations: fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 115/21 and budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5.

Methods

Thirty subjects with mild persistent asthma using only an as-needed short-acting beta-agonist (albuterol) who had at least a 40% change in integrated low-frequency reactance postalbuterol were selected and randomized to receive either fluticasone propionate/salmeterol or budesonide/formoterol (15 subjects each). We collected three to six IOS replicates at baseline, at 5, 20, 40, 60, 120, and 240 minutes postdose at randomization, and after 4 weeks of twice-daily dosing. Blinded investigators calculated IOS frequency-dependent resistance and reactance (R5–R20 and AX), indicative of small-airway dysfunction, and also estimated the peripheral airway resistance (R_p) and peripheral airway compliance (C_p), using a respiratory-impedance model.

Results

At randomization visits, onset of action was detected as early as 5 minutes (t-test, P < 0.05) after fluticasone propionate/salmeterol by C_p, and within 5 minutes after budesonide/formoterol by R5–R20, AX, R_p, and C_p. However, after 4 weeks of dosing, only R_p was significantly different (from 60 to 120 minutes) after fluticasone propionate/salmeterol, while R5–R20, AX, R_p, and C_p were not significantly different within 240 minutes after budesonide/formoterol.

Conclusion

These two ICS/LABA combinations initially improved the peripheral airway function of 12- to 45-year-old asthmatics significantly in about 5 minutes or less, as measured by R5–R20, AX, R_p, and/or C_p. After regular dosing for 4 weeks, pre- to postdose differences in these parameters had diminished significantly due to improved predose status of peripheral airways. Single dosing with ICS/LABA combinations in mild persistent asthma improves small-airway function, and the effect is maintained over a 12-hour interval by regular use for 4 weeks.

Inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β2-agonist pharmacological profiles: effective asthma therapy in practice

Fixed-dose combinations of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) have been used to manage asthma for several years. They are the preferred therapy option for patients who do not achieve optimal control of their asthma with low-dose ICS monotherapy. In Europe, four ICS/LABA products are commercially available for asthma maintenance therapy (fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate, fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate, budesonide/formoterol fumarate and beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate), and other combinations are likely to be developed over the next few years (e.g. mometasone/formoterol fumarate, fluticasone furoate/vilanterol, mometasone/indacaterol). Data from randomized, controlled, clinical trials do not demonstrate a clear overall efficacy difference among ICS/LABA combinations approved for asthma therapy. Conversely, pharmacological data indicate that there may be certain advantages to using one ICS or LABA over another because of the specific pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiles associated with particular treatments. This review article summarizes the pharmacological characteristics oft he various ICSs and LABAs available for the treatment of asthma, including the potential for ICS and LABA synergy, and gives an insight into the rationale for the development of the latest ICS/LABA combination approved for asthma maintenance therapy.

Regular treatment with formoterol and inhaled steroids for chronic asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between beta2-agonists and increases in asthma mortality. Much debate has surrounded possible causal links for this association and whether regular (daily) long-acting beta2-agonists are safe when used alone or in conjunction with inhaled corticosteroids. This is an updated Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of fatal and non-fatal serious adverse events in people with chronic asthma given regular formoterol with inhaled corticosteroids versus the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids alone.

SEARCH METHODS

Trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. Web sites of clinical trial registers were checked for unpublished trial data; Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to formoterol were also checked. The date of the most recent search was August 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled clinical trials with a parallel design were included if they randomly allocated people of any age and severity of asthma to treatment with regular formoterol and inhaled corticosteroids for at least 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events were obtained from the sponsors. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

Following the 2012 update, we have included 20 studies on 10,578 adults and adolescents and seven studies on 2788 children and adolescents. We found data on all-cause fatal and non-fatal serious adverse events for all studies, and we judged the overall risk of bias to be low.Six deaths occurred in participants taking regular formoterol with inhaled corticosteroids, and one in a participant administered regular inhaled corticosteroids alone. The difference was not statistically significant (Peto odds ratio (OR) 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 16.03, low-quality evidence). All deaths were reported in adults, and one was believed to be asthma-related.Non-fatal serious adverse events of any cause were very similar for each treatment in adults (Peto OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.27, moderate-quality evidence), and weak evidence suggested an increase in events in children on regular formoterol (Peto OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.80 to 3.28, moderate-quality evidence).In contrast with all-cause serious adverse events, the addition of new trial data means that asthma-related serious adverse events associated with formoterol are now significantly fewer in adults taking regular formoterol with inhaled corticosteroids (Peto OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.88, moderate-quality evidence). Although a greater number of asthma-related events were reported in children receiving regular formoterol, this finding was not statistically significant (Peto OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.48 to 4.61, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

From the evidence in this review, it is not possible to reassure people with asthma that regular use of inhaled corticosteroids with formoterol carries no risk of increasing mortality in comparison with use of inhaled corticosteroids alone. On the other hand, we have found no conclusive evidence of serious harm, and only one asthma-related death was registered during more than 4200 patient-years of observation with formoterol.In adults, no significant difference in all-cause non-fatal serious adverse events was noted with regular formoterol with inhaled corticosteroids, but a significant reduction in asthma-related serious adverse events was observed in comparison with inhaled corticosteroids alone.In children the number of events was too small, and consequently the results too imprecise, to allow determination of whether the increased risk of all-cause non-fatal serious adverse events found in a previous meta-analysis on regular formoterol alone is abolished by the additional use of inhaled corticosteroids.We await the results of large ongoing surveillance studies mandated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for more information. Clinical decisions and information provided to patients regarding regular use of formoterol have to take into account the balance between known symptomatic benefits of formoterol and the degree of uncertainty associated with its potential harmful effects.

Regular treatment with salmeterol and inhaled steroids for chronic asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between beta2-agonists and increased asthma mortality. There has been much debate about possible causal links for this association, and whether regular (daily) long-acting beta2-agonists are safe. This is an updated systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events in trials which randomised patients with chronic asthma to regular salmeterol and inhaled corticosteroids in comparison to the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised trials using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. We checked websites of clinical trial registers for unpublished trial data. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to salmeterol were also checked. The date of the most recent search is August 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel design controlled clinical trials on patients of any age and severity of asthma if they randomised patients to treatment with regular salmeterol and inhaled corticosteroids (in separate or combined inhalers), and were of at least 12 weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted the review according to standard procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. We obtained unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events from the sponsors, and from FDA submissions. We assessed the quality of evidence according to GRADE recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We have included 35 studies (13,447 participants) in adults and adolescents, and 5 studies (1862 participants) in children in this review. We judged that the overall risk of bias was low, and we obtained data on serious adverse events from all studies. All except 542 adults (and none of the children) who were randomised to salmeterol were given fluticasone in the same (combination) inhaler.Seven deaths occurred in 6986 adults on regular salmeterol with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), and seven deaths in 6461 adults on regular inhaled corticosteroids at the same dose. The difference was not statistically significant (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 2.60, moderate quality evidence). The risk of dying from any cause in adults on ICS was 10 per 10,000, and on salmeterol and ICS we would expect between 3 and 26 deaths per 10,000. No deaths were reported in 1862 children, and no deaths were reported to be asthma-related in adults or children.Non-fatal serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 167 adults on regular salmeterol with ICS, compared to 135 adults on regular ICS; again this was not a statistically significant increase (Peto OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.44, moderate quality evidence). The frequency of serious adverse events was 21 per 1000 in the adults treated with ICS and 24 per 1000 in those treated with salmeterol and ICS. The absolute difference in the risk of non-fatal serious adverse events was an increase of 3 per 1000, that was not statistically significant (risk difference (RD) 0.003; 95% CI -0.002 to 0.008).There were 6 of 930 children with serious adverse events on regular salmeterol with ICS, compared to 5 out of 932 on regular ICS: there was no significant difference between treatments (Peto OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.37 to 3.91, moderate quality evidence).Asthma-related serious adverse events were reported in 29 and 23 adults in each group respectively, a non-significant difference (Peto OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.94, moderate quality evidence), and only 1 asthma-related event was reported in children in each treatment group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no statistically significant differences in fatal or non-fatal serious adverse events in trials in which regular salmeterol was randomly allocated with ICS, in comparison to ICS alone at the same dose. Although 13,447 adults and 1862 children have now been included in trials, the frequency of adverse events is too low and the results are too imprecise to confidently rule out a relative increase in all cause mortality or non-fatal adverse events with salmeterol used in conjunction with ICS. However, the absolute difference between groups in the risk of serious adverse events was very small. We could not determine whether the increase in all cause non-fatal serious adverse events reported in the previous meta-analysis on regular salmeterol alone is abolished by the additional use of regular ICS. We await the results of large ongoing surveillance studies mandated by the FDA to provide more information. There were no asthma-related deaths and few asthma-related serious adverse events. Clinical decisions and information for patients regarding regular use of salmeterol have to take into account the balance between known symptomatic benefits of salmeterol and the degree of uncertainty and concern associated with its potential harmful effects.

Efficacy and optimal dosing interval of the long-acting beta₂ agonist, vilanterol, in persistent asthma: a randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Vilanterol (VI) is a novel once-daily long-acting beta₂ agonist with inherent 24-h activity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of three once-daily doses and one twice-daily dose of VI used concurrently with ICS in adult patients (≥18 years) with persistent asthma. Safety was also assessed.

METHODS

Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, five-period crossover study consisting of 7-day treatment periods separated by 7-day wash-out periods. Seventy-five patients, maintained on ICS, received VI 6.25, 12.5 and 25 mcg once-daily (evening), VI 6.25 mcg twice-daily (morning/evening), and placebo. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) (mean of 23 h and 24 h post evening dose) on Day 7; secondary endpoint was weighted mean 24-h serial FEV(1) on Day 7.

RESULTS

All VI groups demonstrated statistically significant increases in trough FEV(1) versus placebo (p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant increase in weighted mean 24-h FEV(1) for each VI group versus placebo (p < 0.001). The effects of once-daily VI on trough FEV(1) and weighted mean 24-h FEV(1) were dose dependent. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was low in each VI treatment group and was not dose dependent (5-9%; placebo = 18%); no drug-related AEs or serious AEs were reported.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily treatment with VI was well tolerated and associated with improvements in lung function. The VI 6.25 mcg twice-daily dose showed the greatest change in trough FEV(1), however, similar changes in weighted mean 24-h FEV(1) with VI 12.5 mcg once-daily were observed. Although our study was not powered to demonstrate non-inferiority of once- versus twice-daily dosing of VI, the data suggest no advantage over a 24-h period of twice-daily over once-daily dosing for the same total daily dose. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00980200.

Once- vs twice-daily budesonide/formoterol in 6- to 15-year-old patients with stable asthma

OBJECTIVE

To assess efficacy/tolerability of once-daily budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) versus budesonide pMDI (primary) and twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (secondary) in children/adolescents with asthma stabilized with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol.

METHODS

This 12-week multicenter, double-blind randomized controlled study (www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00646321) included 521 patients aged 6 to 15 years with mild/moderate persistent asthma. Patients stabilized during a 4- to 5-week run-in with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI 40/4.5 microgx2 inhalations (160/18 microg daily) received twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI 40/4.5 microgx2 inhalations (160/18 microg daily), once-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI 80/4.5 microgx2 inhalations (160/9 microg daily; evening), or once-daily budesonide pMDI 80 microgx2 inhalations (160 microg daily; evening).

RESULTS

Once- or twice-daily budesonide/formoterol was more effective than budesonide for evening peak expiratory flow (primary variable) at the end of the 24-hour once-daily dosing interval (P<or=.027). Twice-daily budesonide/formoterol demonstrated better efficacy versus once-daily treatments for evening predose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (P<or=.011), versus budesonide for daytime/nighttime rescue medication (P<or=.023), and versus once-daily budesonide/formoterol for daytime rescue medication (last 12 hours of once-daily dosing) (P=.032). There were no significant between-group differences for daytime/nighttime asthma symptoms, nighttime awakenings attributed to asthma, or health-related quality of life. Fewer patients experienced asthma worsening (predefined criteria) with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (8.2%) versus once-daily budesonide (15.5%) (P=.036) or once-daily budesonide/formoterol (19.6%) (P=.002). All treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily budesonide/formoterol demonstrated significantly better efficacy than once-daily budesonide for most pulmonary-function variables. Twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (160/18 microg daily) maintenance therapy was generally more effective than stepping down to once-daily dosing (160/9 microg daily). Treatments were well tolerated, and there was no evident safety benefit for once- versus twice-daily dosing.

Efficacy and tolerability of once-daily budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler in adults and adolescents with asthma previously stable with twice-daily budesonide/ formoterol dosing

BACKGROUND

The goal of asthma therapy is to control symptoms using minimal pharmacologic intervention.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily budesonide/formoterol vs once-daily budesonide in patients stable with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol.

METHODS

This double-blind, 12-week study enrolled 619 patients 12 years and older with mild to moderate asthma. After 4 to 5 weeks of twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), 80/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (320/18 microg/d), stable patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 2 inhalations twice daily of budesonide/formoterol pMDI, 80/4.5 microg (320/18 microg/d), or 2 inhalations once daily (evening) of budesonide/formoterol pMDI, 160/4.5 microg or 80/4.5 microg (320/9 microg or 160/9 microg/d), or budesonide pMDI, 160 microg (320 microg/d).

RESULTS

All budesonide/formoterol groups maintained significantly more favorable evening predose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), daytime/nighttime asthma symptoms, nighttime rescue medication use, and rescue medication-free days vs budesonide. Variables evaluated during the end of the once-daily dosing interval (evening predose FEV1, evening PEF, daytime asthma symptoms, and daytime rescue medication use) significantly favored twice-daily budesonide/formoterol vs all treatments. Twice-daily budesonide/formoterol demonstrated significantly more favorable results for symptom-free and asthma control days vs all treatments and awakening-free nights vs budesonide. Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire and Asthma Control Questionnaire results significantly favored twice-daily budesonide/formoterol vs budesonide (P < or = .018). All treatments were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Pulmonary function and asthma control were more effectively maintained with all budesonide/formoterol regimens vs once-daily budesonide and with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol at twice the daily formoterol dose vs both once-daily budesonide/formoterol doses.

Regular treatment with salmeterol and inhaled steroids for chronic asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between beta(2)-agonists and increased asthma mortality. There has been much debate about possible causal links for this association, and whether regular (daily) long-acting beta(2)-agonists are safe.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to assess the risk of fatal and non-fatal serious adverse events in trials that randomised patients with chronic asthma to regular salmeterol with inhaled corticosteroids versus the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids alone.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. Web sites of clinical trial registers were checked for unpublished trial data and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to salmeterol were also checked. The date of the most recent search was October 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled parallel design clinical trials on patients of any age and severity of asthma were included if they randomised patients to treatment with regular salmeterol and inhaled corticosteroids (in separate or combined inhalers), and were of at least 12 weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion in the review. Outcome data were independently extracted by two authors. Unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events were obtained from the sponsors, and from FDA submissions.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 30 studies (10,873 participants) in adults and adolescents, and three studies (1,173 participants) in children. The overall risk of bias was low and data on serious adverse events were obtained from all studies.Six deaths occurred in 5,710 adults on regular salmeterol with inhaled corticosteroids, and five deaths in 5,163 adults on regular inhaled corticosteroids at the same dose. The difference was not statistically significant (Peto OR 1.05; 95% CI 0.32 to 3.47) and the absolute difference between groups in risk of death of any cause was 0.00005 (95% CI -0.002 to 0.002). No deaths were reported in 1,173 children, and no deaths were reported to be asthma-related.Non-fatal serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 134 adults on regular salmeterol with inhaled corticosteroids, compared to 103 adults on regular inhaled corticosteroids; again this was not a significant increase (Peto OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.52). The absolute difference in the risk of non-fatal serious adverse events was 0.003 (95% CI -0.002 to 0.009).There were three of 586 children with serious adverse events on regular salmeterol with inhaled corticosteroids, compared to four out of 587 on regular inhaled corticosteroids: there was no significant difference between treatments (Peto OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.17 to 3.31).Asthma-related serious adverse events were reported in 23 and 21 adults in each group respectively, a non-significant difference (Peto OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.73), and only one event was reported in children.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences have been found in fatal or non-fatal serious adverse events in trials in which regular salmeterol has been randomly allocated with inhaled corticosteroids, in comparison to inhaled corticosteroids at the same dose. Although 10,873 adults and 1,173 children have been included in trials, the number of patients suffering adverse events is too small, and the results are too imprecise to confidently rule out a relative increase in all-cause mortality or non-fatal adverse events. It is therefore not possible to determine whether the increase in all-cause non-fatal serious adverse events reported in the previous meta-analysis on regular salmeterol alone is abolished by the additional use of regular inhaled corticosteroids. The absolute difference between groups in the risk of serious adverse events was small. There were no asthma-related deaths and few asthma-related serious adverse events. Clinical decisions and information for patients regarding regular use of salmeterol have to take into account the balance between known symptomatic benefits of salmeterol and the degree of uncertainty and concern associated with its potential harmful effects.

Inhaled corticosteroids as combination therapy with beta-adrenergic agonists in airways disease: present and future

Inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy in combination with long-acting beta-adrenergic agonists represents the most important treatment for chronic airways diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). ICS therapy forms the basis for treatment of asthma of all severities, improving asthma control, lung function and preventing exacerbations of disease. Use of ICS has also been established in the treatment of COPD, particularly symptomatic patients, who experience useful gains in quality of life, likely from an improvement in symptoms such as breathlessness and in reduction in exacerbations, and an attenuation of the yearly rate of deterioration in lung function. The addition of long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) therapy with ICS increases the efficacy of ICS effects in moderate-to-severe asthma. Thus, a 800 mug daily dose of the ICS budesonide reduced severe exacerbation rates by 49% compared to a low dose of 200 mug daily, and addition of the LABA formoterol to budesonide (800 mug) led to a 63% reduction. In COPD, the effects of ICS are less prominent but there are beneficial effects on the decline in FEV(1) and the rate of exacerbations. A reduction in the rate of decline in FEV(1) of 16 ml/year with a 25% reduction in exacerbation rate has been reported with the salmeterol and fluticasone combination. A non-significant 17.5% reduction in all-cause mortality rate with ICS and LABA is reported. Chronic inflammation is a feature of both asthma and COPD, although there are site and characteristic differences. ICS targets this inflammation although this effect of ICS is less effective in patients with severe asthma and with COPD; however, addition of LABA may potentiate the anti-inflammatory effects of ICS. An important consideration is the presence of corticosteroid insensitivity in these patients. Currently available ICS have variably potent binding activities to specific glucocorticoid receptors, leading to inhibition of gene expression by either binding to DNA and inducing anti-inflammatory genes or by repressing the induction of pro-inflammatory mediators. Local side effects of ICS include oral candidiasis, hoarseness and dysphonia, while systemic side effects, such as easy bruising and reduction in growth velocity or bone mineral densitometry, are usually restricted to doses above maximally recommended doses. Use of LABA alone in patients with asthma increases the risk of asthma-related events including deaths, but this is less observed with the combination of ICS and LABA. Therefore, use of LABA alone is not recommended for asthma therapy. Future progress in ICS development will be characterised by the introduction of ICS with greater efficacy with a limited side-effect profile, and by longer-acting ICS that can be used in combination with once-daily LABAs. Other agents that could improve the efficacy of corticosteroids or reverse corticosteroid insensitivity may be added to ICS. ICS in combination with LABAs will continue to remain the main focus of treatment of airways diseases.

Regular treatment with formoterol and inhaled steroids for chronic asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between beta(2)-agonists and increases in asthma mortality. There has been much debate about possible causal links for this association, and whether regular (daily) long-acting beta(2)-agonists are safe when used alone or in conjunction with inhaled corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to assess the risk of fatal and non-fatal serious adverse events in trials that randomised patients with chronic asthma to regular formoterol with inhaled corticosteroids versus the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids alone.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. Web sites of clinical trial registers were checked for unpublished trial data and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to formoterol were also checked. The date of the most recent search was October 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled parallel design clinical trials on patients of any age and severity of asthma were included if they randomised patients to treatment with regular formoterol and inhaled corticosteroids, and were of at least 12 weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion in the review. Outcome data were independently extracted by two authors. Unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events were obtained from the sponsors.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 14 studies on adults and adolescents (8,028 participants) and seven studies on children and adolescents (2,788 participants). Data on all cause fatal and non-fatal serious adverse events were found for all studies, and the overall risk of bias was low.Four deaths occurred on regular formoterol with inhaled corticosteroids, and none on regular inhaled corticosteroids alone. All the deaths were in adults, and one was reported to be asthma-related. The difference was not statistically significant.Non-fatal serious adverse events of any cause were very similar in adults [Peto Odds Ratio 0.99 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.33)], and an increase in events in children on regular formoterol was not statistically significant [Peto Odds Ratio 1.62 (95% CI 0.80 to 3.28)].Asthma related serious adverse events on formoterol were lower in adults [Peto Odds Ratio 0.53 (95% CI 0.28 to 1.00)] and although they were higher in children [Peto Odds Ratio 1.49 (95% CI 0.48 to 4.61)], this was not statistically significant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is not possible, from the data in this review, to reassure people with asthma that inhaled corticosteroids with regular formoterol carries no risk of increasing mortality in comparison to inhaled corticosteroids alone as all four deaths occurred among 6,594 people using inhaled corticosteroids with formoterol. On the other hand, we have found no conclusive evidence of harm and there was only one asthma related death registered during over 3,000 patient year observation on formoterol. In adults, the decrease in asthma-related serious adverse events on regular formoterol with inhaled corticosteroids was not accompanied by a decrease in all cause serious adverse events. In children the number of events was too small, and consequently the results too imprecise, to determine whether the increase in all cause non-fatal serious adverse events found in the previous meta-analysis on regular formoterol alone is abolished by the additional use of inhaled corticosteroids. Clinical decisions and information for patients regarding regular use of formoterol have to take into account the balance between known symptomatic benefits of formoterol and the degree of uncertainty and concern associated with its potential harmful effects.

Differences in the pharmacodynamics of budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone reflect differences in their therapeutic usefulness in asthma

Although the available inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta( 2)-agonist (LABA) combinations principally work in a similar fashion, they differ in several important ways, leading to different efficacy. The ICS/LABA combination product budesonide/formoterol can be used as both maintenance and reliever therapy, providing a fixed maintenance dose, which does not change, and replacing short-acting beta(2)-agonists as relievers thereby allowing intervention to address the underlying inflammation at the earliest sign of symptomatic worsening. This approach is not suitable for other combination products such as salmeterol/fluticasone. Here we review the pharmacological differences of budesonide/ formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone that permit the use of budesonide/formoterol as both maintenance and reliever therapy.

Combined salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus fluticasone propionate alone in mild asthma : a placebo-controlled comparison

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Combined therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) is the recommended approach for the treatment of patients with asthma that is uncontrolled on ICSs alone. Additional studies are needed to assess the safety and efficacy of combination treatment with ICSs and LABAs in patients with mild asthma. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination (SFC) with once-daily fluticasone propionate (FP) over a 12-week treatment period in patients with mild persistent asthma.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study carried out in primary care or at a hospital outpatient department and included patients 12-79 years of age with mild persistent asthma (n = 458). After a 2-week run-in period, patients were randomized to receive SFC 50 microg/100 microg (n = 149), FP 100 microg (n = 154) or placebo (n = 155) once daily in the morning for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was patient-recorded pre-dose mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). Other assessments included asthma symptom scores, use of rescue medication and investigator-recorded exacerbations. Lung function was measured and assessed during clinic visits.

RESULTS

For the primary efficacy endpoint of mean change in morning PEF, SFC achieved significantly greater increases from baseline than both placebo (difference in adjusted means 23 L/min; 95% CI 15.0, 30.3; p < 0.001) and FP (difference in adjusted means 14 L/min; 95% CI 6.3, 21.7; p < 0.001). Compared with those who received FP, patients in the SFC group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in mean evening PEF (95% CI 11.7, 28.1; p < 0.001), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (95% CI 0.093, 0.257; p < 0.001), forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of forced vital capacity (95% CI 0.242, 0.617; p < 0.001), the percentage of symptom-free days (95% CI 0.34, 0.87; p = 0.011), and the percentage of rescue medication-free days (95% CI 0.34, 0.90; p = 0.018). During weeks 5-12, 52% of patients in the SFC group achieved 'well controlled' asthma, compared with 42% and 26% of patients in the FP and placebo groups, respectively. Only one patient (receiving placebo) had a severe asthma exacerbation during the study; the frequency of adverse events was similar across the three treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily SFC 50 microg/100 microg provided significantly greater improvements in lung function and in asthma symptoms than once-daily FP 100 microg alone in patients with mild persistent asthma. However, twice-daily treatment with either SFC or ICSs plus short acting beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonists could be required to achieve guideline-defined asthma control in some patients.

Efficacy and safety of single therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of indacaterol versus salmeterol and salbutamol in patients with asthma

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the bronchodilator efficacy and safety of indacaterol with placebo, salbutamol and salmeterol, in patients with persistent asthma, at single therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a randomised, open-label crossover study in adult subjects with asthma (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)] > or = 60% predicted). In part A, patients (n = 20) received single doses of indacaterol 200 microg, salbutamol 200 microg, salmeterol 50 microg and placebo. In part B, patients (n = 19) received single doses of indacaterol 1000 microg, salbutamol 1000 microg, salmeterol 250 microg and placebo. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES;

RESULTS

For the primary endpoint, FEV(1) area under the effect curve during 0-24 h, indacaterol 200 microg was statistically superior to placebo and salbutamol. Indacaterol 200 microg FEV(1) was higher than placebo (5 min to 24 h), salbutamol 200 microg (4-24 h), and salmeterol 50 microg (5 and 15 min and 22 and 24 h). Few adverse events were reported; all were mild or moderate in severity. Initial changes were observed in glucose, potassium, heart rate and QTc interval, but all values remained within normal ranges. Values matched placebo levels after a shorter time for indacaterol 1000 microg than for salmeterol 250 microg.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-dose, open-label study, indacaterol 200 microg provided effective 24-h bronchodilation, with a longer duration than salmeterol 50 microg and a good overall safety profile. The sustained bronchodilation of indacaterol 1000 microg was not associated with sustained systemic adverse effects.

Computational fluid dynamics can detect changes in airway resistance in asthmatics after acute bronchodilation

The effect of a bronchodilator in asthmatics is only partially described by changes in spirometric values since no information on regional differences can be obtained. Imaging techniques like high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) provide further information but lack detailed information on specific airway responses. The aim of the present study was to improve the actual imaging techniques by subsequent analysis of the imaging data using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). We studied 14 mild to moderately severe asthmatics. Ten patients underwent HRCT before and 4h after inhalation of a novel long acting beta(2) agonist (LABA) that acts shortly after inhalation. Four patients were studied for chronic effects and underwent CT scans twice after adequate wash-out of bronchodilators. In the active group, a significant bronchodilator response was seen with a forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) increase of 8.78 +/- -6.27% pred vs -3.38 +/- 6.87% pred in the control group. The changes in FEV1 correlated significantly with the changes in distal airway volume (r = 0.69, p = 0.007), total airway resistance (r = -0.73, p = 0.003) and distal airway resistance (r = -0.76, p = 0.002) as calculated with the CFD method. The changes in distal R(aw) were not fully homogeneous. In some patients with normal FEV1 at baseline, CFD-based changes in R(aw) were still detectable. We conclude that CFD calculations, based on airway geometries of asthmatic patients, provide additional information about changes in regional R(aw). All changes in the CFD-based calculated R(aw) significantly correlate with the observed changes in spirometric values therefore validating the CFD method for the studied application.