Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
N Engl J Med ; 375(9): 840-9, 2016 09 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27579634

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) have been shown to increase the risk of asthma-related death among adults and the risk of asthma-related hospitalization among children. It is unknown whether the concomitant use of inhaled glucocorticoids with LABAs mitigates those risks. This trial prospectively evaluated the safety of the LABA salmeterol, added to fluticasone propionate, in a fixed-dose combination in children. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, children 4 to 11 years of age who required daily asthma medications and had a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year to receive fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization), as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The statistical design specified that noninferiority would be shown if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio for the primary safety end point was less than 2.675. The main efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation that led to treatment with systemic glucocorticoids, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Among the 6208 patients, 27 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 21 in the fluticasone-alone group had a serious asthma-related event (all were hospitalizations); the hazard ratio with fluticasone-salmeterol versus fluticasone alone was 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 2.27), which showed the noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol (P=0.006). A total of 265 patients (8.5%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 309 (10.0%) in the fluticasone-alone group had a severe asthma exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children with asthma, salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone was associated with the risk of a serious asthma-related event that was similar to the risk with fluticasone alone. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; VESTRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01462344 .).


Asunto(s)
Asma/tratamiento farmacológico , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Combinación Fluticasona-Salmeterol/administración & dosificación , Fluticasona/administración & dosificación , Administración por Inhalación , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 1/administración & dosificación , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 1/efectos adversos , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/administración & dosificación , Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/efectos adversos , Broncodilatadores/efectos adversos , Niño , Preescolar , Preparaciones de Acción Retardada , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Fluticasona/efectos adversos , Combinación Fluticasona-Salmeterol/efectos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Inhaladores de Dosis Medida , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales
2.
COPD ; 13(2): 167-75, 2016.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26516724

RESUMEN

Patients' preference is an important factor in selecting an inhaler treatment for COPD. The DISKUS® dry powder inhaler (DPI), which has been available to deliver several COPD medications for a decade, and the ELLIPTA® DPI, developed for the delivery of newer once-daily medications for patients with COPD, were studied in terms of patient preference and inhaler-specific attributes. We conducted a randomized, open-label, crossover study in patients with COPD. Patients used placebo ELLIPTA DPI once daily and placebo DISKUS DPI twice daily, for ∼1 week each, while continuing their COPD medications. Endpoints were: inhaler preference based on size of the numbers on the dose-counter (primary); the number of steps needed and inhaler size (secondary); and based on comfort of the mouthpiece, ease of opening, overall preference, and dosing regimen preference ('other'). Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs). A total of 287 patients were randomized. A significantly (p < 0.001) larger proportion of patients preferred the ELLIPTA DPI over DISKUS DPI for each of the tested attributes and overall, and preferred once-daily over twice-daily dosing. AEs were reported for 36 patients (13%); one (dry mouth) was considered to be related to the placebo-containing DISKUS DPI. Three patients had five non-fatal serious AEs, none were deemed inhaler-related. This study demonstrated that more patients with COPD preferred five specific inhaler attributes of the ELLIPTA DPI over DISKUS DPI and overall, and preferred once-daily versus twice-daily dosing. Safety profiles were consistent with those expected for COPD.


Asunto(s)
Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Cooperación del Paciente , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración por Inhalación , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios Cruzados , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Esquema de Medicación , Inhaladores de Polvo Seco , Diseño de Equipo , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Prim Care Respir J ; 21(3): 267-75, 2012 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22614920

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Uncomplicated acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is usually a self-limiting inflammatory condition often treated with antibiotics. AIMS: To assess the safety and efficacy of fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS) compared with placebo for symptomatic relief of uncomplicated ARS. METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, 2-week treatment study of FFNS 110 µg once and twice daily was undertaken in adults/adolescents. RESULTS: A statistically significant reduction was seen in the daily major symptoms score, a composite score of three individual symptoms (nasal congestion/stuffiness, sinus headache/pressure or facial pain/pressure, and postnasal drip on a 0-3 scale) by both FFNS doses compared with placebo (least square mean differences vs. placebo of -0.386 (p=0.008) and -0.357 (p=0.014) for once daily and twice daily FFNS, respectively). The differences in median times to symptom improvement were not statistically significant between each dose of FFNS (7 days) and placebo (8 days). There were no treatment differences in antibiotic use for possible fulminant bacterial rhinosinusitis (3% in each group). The safety profile of FFNS was similar to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: FFNS reduces symptoms of uncomplicated ARS compared with placebo and is well tolerated, providing support for withholding antibiotics in selected patients.


Asunto(s)
Androstadienos/administración & dosificación , Rinitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Sinusitis/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Aguda , Adulto , Método Doble Ciego , Esquema de Medicación , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Rociadores Nasales
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA