Budesonide and formoterol in a single inhaler controls asthma in adolescents

Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy in adolescent patients with asthma

Asthma control is often suboptimal in adolescents, but few studies have evaluated asthma treatments in this population.This post hoc analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) for treatment of persistent asthma in adolescent (age 12-17 years) subgroups within six randomised, double-blind trials. The primary end-point was time to first severe exacerbation. Secondary end-points included number of severe exacerbations, asthma-related symptoms, night-time awakenings, morning peak expiratory flow, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, as-needed medication use and five-item asthma control questionnaire scores.In adolescents (n=1847), BUD/FORM MART was similar to or more effective than comparators across each of the studies in reducing the risk of a first severe exacerbation (hazard ratios (HR) BUD/FORM MART versus comparators 0.15-1.01; pooled HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.70), with comparable outcomes to the adult subgroups (n=12 197). Similar treatment benefits for BUD/FORM MART were observed for secondary end-points. As-needed medication use was lower with BUD/FORM MART than comparators, and BUD/FORM as-needed use was lower in adolescents than adults. Treatment was well tolerated.This analysis supports the use of BUD/FORM MART in adolescents with persistent asthma, its efficacy and safety being consistent with that reported for adults.

Inhaled corticosteroids or long-acting beta-agonists alone or in fixed-dose combinations in asthma treatment: a systematic review of fluticasone/budesonide and formoterol/salmeterol

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting inhaled beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) are recommended treatment options for asthma.

OBJECTIVE

This review compares the clinical effectiveness and tolerability of the ICSs fluticasone propionate and budesonide and the LABAs formoterol fumarate and salmeterol xinafoate administered alone or in combination.

METHODS

A systematic review of the clinical studies available on MEDLINE (database period, 1950-September 2009) was conducted to assess English-language randomized controlled trials in children and adults with asthma. Treatment outcomes included lung function, symptom-free days (SFDs), use of rescue/reliever medications, asthma exacerbations, and tolerability profile.

RESULTS

Use of fluticasone was associated with significantly greater improvement in lung function and better asthma symptom control than budesonide. Similarly, formoterol was associated with significantly greater improvement in lung function and better asthma symptom control (as measured by less rescue medication use and more SFDs) compared with salmeterol. Single inhaler combination regimens (budesonide/ formoterol and fluticasone/salmeterol) were frequently more effective in improving all treatment outcomes than either monotherapy alone. Across all comparisons, a review of studies in adults and children did not find statistically significant differences in outcomes between the ICS and LABA therapies considered in this research. In general, no differences in tolerability profiles were reported between the ICS and LABA options, although the risk for growth retardation was lower with fluticasone than budesonide and with budesonide/formoterol than with budesonide monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, fluticasone and formoterol appear to provide improved therapeutic benefits versus budesonide and salmeterol, respectively. Both fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/ formoterol combination therapies appeared to be associated with greater improvements in outcomes measures than the corresponding ICS and LABA monotherapies.

Treatment with inhaled corticosteroids in asthma is too often discontinued

PURPOSE

To study persistence with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and its determinants in asthma-patients.

METHODS

From the PHARMO database, asthma-patients (age < 35 years) with a first dispensing for ICS in 1999-2002 and > or = 2 dispensings in the first year were included. Persistence during the first year was defined as the number of days from start to time of first failure to continue renewal of the initial ICS. Potential determinants of persistence were assessed at ICS-start and 1 year before.

RESULTS

The study-cohort included 5563 new users of single ICS and 297 of fixed-combined ICS. Less than 10% of patients using single ICS and 15% of patients using fixed-combined ICS were persistent at 1 year. Similar persistence-rates were observed when stratified for age (children/adolescents: 0-18 years and adults: 19-34 years). Increased persistence with single ICS was observed with the type of ICS (budesonide), prescriber (specialist), prior use of long-acting beta-agonists, previous hospitalization for asthma, metered-dose inhaler, low starting-dose and once-daily dosing regimen at start. Persistence with fixed combined ICS-treatment increased with younger age and was decreased in patients having high starting-dose of ICS and prior use of antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

New users of both single and fixed combined ICS have alarming low persistence rates with ICS-treatment in the first year of follow-up. Persistence was mainly related to patient factors, such as severity of disease, and to treatment-related factors, such as once-daily dosing frequency.

Advances in asthma and COPD management: delivering CFC-free inhaled therapy using Modulite technology

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) are currently used in the management of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Localized targeted delivery of these drugs into the lungs is achieved by means of two types of inhalation devices; pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) and dry powder-inhalers (DPIs). For environmental reasons, the chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants used in pMDIs are now being replaced by ozone friendly hydrofluoroalkanes (HFAs). These new generation HFA-based pMDIs, developed to provide effective lung deposition of the active moiety, have a favorable safety and tolerability profile. However, HFA-based re-formulation of LABAs and ICS for pMDIs presents particular technical difficulties, especially in terms of ensuring dose content uniformity. This review focuses on the technology and clinical efficacy of the HFA solution pMDIs using Modulite platform technology (Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A). Modulite technology allows the development of HFA solution formulations that can mimic the established CFC-based drug formulations on a microgram to microgram basis and provides formulations with novel particle size distributions that improve on existing delivery systems; by manipulation of aerosol clouds and particle size, the delivery of HFA-formulated drugs can be optimized to either achieve fine particle fractions and deposition patterns similar to established CFC-based drug formulations, thus facilitating the transition to new environment-friendly pMDIs in the clinical setting, or achieve finer drug particles able to penetrate deeper into the bronchi for targeted drug delivery as medical need may dictate. Long-term, multiple-dose clinical studies of Modulite formulations of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP), budesonide and formoterol have been demonstrated to be therapeutically equivalent to their respective previously established CFC or DPI formulations. As a result, a number of Modulite pMDIs have either recently gained regulatory approval in several European countries, or have completed clinical trials and are in the regulatory submission phase. Availability, in pMDI form, of drugs like formoterol, ICSs, and ICS/LABA combinations, all central to the effective management of asthma and COPD, is therefore expected to impact positively in assuring the continued availability of vital treatment options to patients and physicians.

Patient perspectives on multiple medications versus combined pills: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

A growing number of patients are taking multiple medications. Unfortunately, adherence may fall as drug numbers and procedural complexity increase. While there are plausible theoretical reasons why combining pills might improve non-adherence, patients' attitudes are unknown.

AIM

To explore attitudes and practices to medication regimens among patients already in receipt of multiple medications, and to assess whether a combined tablet would be perceived as advantageous.

DESIGN

Qualitative study.

METHODS

Ninety-two men and women aged >40 years currently receiving both antihypertensive and cholesterol-lowering medications took part in 14 focus groups.

RESULTS

Drugs were seen as unwelcome but necessary. Some took drugs flexibly by changing dose timing, thereby increasing the complexity of their regimen. A routine was seen as the key to coping with multiple medications, although it was sometimes threatened by changes in prescriptions and life circumstances. While some participants welcomed a combined pill, there was uncertainty about whether a combination that mirrored their current doses would be available. There were also concerns about tablet size, allergies, the attribution of side-effects, timing of tablets throughout the day, and the ability to alter dose levels.

CONCLUSION

While some patients would be willing to try a combined pill and would appreciate the associated convenience, they are likely to have a number of concerns that prescribers should address. Willingness to move to combined therapy may be hindered if drug combinations that mirror personalized and trusted regimens are not available.