Dental impaction pain model as a potential tool to evaluate drugs with efficacy in neuropathic pain.

Intravenous lidocaine, a nonspecific Na-channel blocker, was used to assess the dental impaction model for evaluation of neuropathic pain drugs. Sixty patients, experiencing moderate or severe pain after removal of > or = 2 third molars, were randomized (2:2:1:1) to lidocaine (4 mg/kg; maximal dose 300 mg), oxycodone/acetaminophen (10/650 mg), placebo, and active placebo (diphenhydramine, 50 mg). Lidocaine provided a modest degree of pain relief. Predefined endpoints of total pain relief and sum of pain intensity at 2, 4, and 6 hours showed numerically, not statistically significantly, greater pain relief versus placebo. A significantly greater effect over placebo was observed in peak effect and at shorter time points (30 minutes and 1 hour), consistent with the pharmacokinetic profile (plasma concentration of approximately 2 mug/mL). Oxycodone/acetaminophen provided significantly greater analgesia versus placebo, validating study conduct, and significantly greater pain relief was observed versus lidocaine, which is consistent with a smaller portion of dental extraction pain being of neuropathic origin.

The analgesic effect of etoricoxib relative to that of cetaminophen analgesics: a randomized, controlled single-dose study in acute dental impaction pain.

BACKGROUND: To compare the analgesic effect of single doses of etoricoxib 120 mg, oxycodone/ acetaminophen 10 mg/650 mg and codeine/ acetaminophen 60 mg/600 mg in acute pain using the dental impaction model. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, patients reported pain intensity and pain relief (16 times) and global scores (twice) during a 24-h period. The primary endpoint was the overall analgesic effect, total pain relief over 6 h (TOPAR6). Other endpoints were patient global evaluation, time to onset (2-stopwatch method), duration of analgesic effect (median time to and amount of rescue medication use). Tolerability was evaluated by overall and opioid-related (nausea and vomiting) adverse experiences. RESULTS: 302 patients (mean age 23; 63% women; 63 % White) were randomized to etoricoxib 120 mg, oxycodone/acetaminophen 10 mg/650 mg, codeine/acetaminophen 60 mg/600 mg, and placebo (2:2:1:1). Etoricoxib demonstrated significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy (TOPAR6) (13.2 units) versus oxycodone/acetaminophen (10.2 units); and codeine/acetaminophen (6.0 units); p < 0.001 for all. All active treatments were superior to placebo. Median time to onset was significantly (p < 0.001) shorter for oxycodone/acetaminophen (20 min) and numerically but not significantly shorter (p = 0.259) for codeine/acetaminophen (26 min) compared with etoricoxib (40 min). Etoricoxib (24 h) had a significantly longer lasting analgesic effect than oxycodone/acetaminophen (5.3 h), codeine/acetaminophen (2.7 h), and placebo (1.7 h) (p < 0.001 for all). Etoricoxib patients experienced fewer clinical adverse experiences than patients on oxycodone/acetaminophen and codeine/acetaminophen, specifically, significantly (p < 0.05) fewer episodes of nausea. CONCLUSION: Etoricoxib 120 mg provided superior overall analgesic effect with a smaller percentage of patients experiencing nausea versus both oxycodone/acetaminophen 10 mg/650 mg and codeine/acetaminophen 60 mg/600 mg.

The time to onset and overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg: a meta-analysis of 13 randomized clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the time to onset of analgesia of rofecoxib based on a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled, postoperative oral surgery pain studies. METHODS: A search on MEDLINE and of Merck data on file was conducted to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis inclusion criteria required that patients were treated with a single oral dose of rofecoxib 50 mg when they experienced moderate or severe pain after surgical extraction of > or = 2 third molars; study design involved patient randomization, double-blinding, and matching placebo, and onset data from individual patients were available. The meta-analysis of time to onset also required that studies used the two-stopwatch method. Eleven studies fulfilled the onset criteria and included patients who received a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg (N = 1220) or placebo (N = 483). These studies were analyzed to determine time to onset of analgesia, time to perceptible pain relief, percentage of patients achieving onset of analgesia, and duration of analgesia. Six of the 11 studies included a nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (N = 303) and were included in the onset meta-analysis for comparison. The meta-analysis of overall efficacy also required that data on total pain relief scores over 8 hours were available. Over-all effectiveness of analgesia was based on analysis of 13 studies involving 1330 rofecoxib patients and 570 placebo patients on the endpoints of total pain relief scores over 8 hours and patient global assessment of response to therapy at 24 hours. Eight of the 13 studies with a nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug comparator (N = 391) were included for the efficacy meta-analysis. RESULTS: Patient demographics and baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups in each study. Median time to onset of analgesia for rofecoxib was 34 minutes (95% CI, 31-38 minutes), significantly faster than placebo, which did not achieve onset within the 4 hours the assessment was conducted (P < 0.001). Duration of analgesia for rofecoxib 50 mg was > 24 hours. Rofecoxib achieved a greater mean total pain relief score over 8 hours than placebo (17.4 versus 4.4; P < 0.001) and a greater patient response rate on patient global assessment of response to therapy at 24 hours than placebo (73% versus 16%; P < 0.001). Outcomes were similar between the rofecoxib group and the nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug group. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of over 1200 rofecoxib-treated patients, a single dose of rofecoxib 50 mg demonstrated a rapid onset of analgesia in approximately half an hour combined with sustained effectiveness, supporting its use as a treatment of acute pain.

A comparison of rofecoxib versus celecoxib in treating pain after dental surgery: a single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, single-dose study using the dental impaction pain model.

BACKGROUND: Rofecoxib and celecoxib, selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, have analgesic efficacy similar to that of nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to confirm earlier findings that the overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was superior to that of celecoxib 200 mg and to extend the comparison to include celecoxib 400 mg. METHODS: In this single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-comparator-controlled, parallel-group, single-dose study, patients who experienced moderate or severe pain after surgical extraction of at least 2 third molars received a single oral dose of either rofecoxib 50 mg, celecoxib 400 mg, celecoxib 200 mg, ibuprofen 400 mg, or placebo. Patients recorded scores of pain intensity, pain relief, and global assessment at prespecified time intervals throughout the 24-hour period after dosing. The end points were total pain relief (TOPAR) score over 8 hours (TOPAR8; primary end point), TOPAR score over 12 hours (TOPAR12), sum of pain intensity difference (SPID) over 8 and 12 hours (SPID8 and SPID12), patient's global assessment of study drug at 8 hours, time to confirmed perceptible pain relief (ie, time to onset of analgesic effect), peak pain intensity difference (PID), peak pain relief, time to first dose of rescue medication (ie, duration of analgesic effect), and percentage of patients using rescue medication. RESULTS: A total of 482 patients (358 females, 124 males; mean age, 22.1 years) were enrolled. Rofecoxib 50 mg (n = 151 patients) demonstrated significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy compared with celecoxib 400 mg (n = 151), as measured by TOPAR8 (least squares mean [SE] 17.2 [0.8] vs 15.0 [0.8]; P < 0.05) and TOPAR12 (25.3 [1.2] vs 21.0 [1.2]; P < 0.05), as well as a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect (P < 0.05). Time to onset of analgesic effect and peak analgesic effect were similar for rofecoxib 50 mg and celecoxib 400 mg. Rofecoxib also showed significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy than did celecoxib 200 mg (n = 90), including greater TOPAR8 scores (17.2 [0.8] vs 11.5 [1.1]; P < 0.001), faster onset of analgesic effect (P < 0.001), greater peak analgesic effect (P < 0.001 for peak pain relief and peak PID), and longer duration of analgesic effect (P < 0.001). The overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was similar to that of ibuprofen 400 mg (n = 45), except that the duration of analgesic effect of rofecoxib 50 mg was significantly longer (P < 0.001). All active treatments produced significantly greater overall analgesic efficacy compared with that of placebo (P < 0.001 for all scores [TOPAR8, TOPAR12, SPID8, SPID12, and patient's global assessment] for all study drugs). The adverse-events (AE) profile was generally similar in all treatment groups. The 3 most common AEs were nausea, postextraction alveolitis, and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, rofecoxib 50 mg provided generally superior overall analgesic efficacy compared with that of celecoxib 400 and 200 mg, including a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect. The overall analgesic efficacy of rofecoxib 50 mg was generally similar to that of ibuprofen 400 mg, except for a significantly longer duration of analgesic effect.

Etoricoxib in acute pain associated with dental surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active comparator-controlled dose-ranging study.

BACKGROUND: Patients experiencing acute pain after surgery, including dental surgery, often require analgesia. Ideally, the chosen analgesic should have a rapid onset and sustained effect. Etoricoxib is a new cyclooxygenase-2-selective inhibitor that has demonstrated analgesic efficacy in the treatment of acute pain with a rapid onset and long-lasting pain relief. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the analgesic effect of single oral doses of etoricoxib 60, 120, 180, and 240 mg compared with placebo in the treatment of pain after dental surgery. Ibuprofen was used as an active control. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, single-dose, placebo- and active comparator-controlled study performed at a single center. It consisted of 3 visits (prestudy, treatment, and poststudy). Eligible patients were aged > or =16 years with moderate or severe pain after surgical extraction of > or =2 third molars, of which > or =1 was an impacted mandibular molar. Patients were assessed over 24 hours and reported pain intensity and pain relied at 14 predefined time points. Plasma samples for a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis were collected from a subset of patients at baseline and the 14 predefined time points. The end points included total pain relief over 8 hours (TOPAR8, the primary end point), sum of pain intensity difference over 8 hours, patient's global evaluation of treatment, median time to onset of pain relief (2-stopwatch method), peak pain relief, and duration of analgesic effect (median time to use of rescue medication). Adverse events were collected up to 14 days postdose. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-eight (63.1% women, 36.9% men; mean age, 21.1 years; 72.1% white, 27.9% other; mean number of third molars removed, 3.5; 65.2% experiencing moderate pain) were randomly allocated to receive etoricoxib 60 mg (n = 75), etoricoxib 120 mg (n = 76), etoricoxib 180 mg (n = 74), etoricoxib 240 mg (n = 76), ibuprofen 400 mg (n = 48), and placebo (n = 49). All active treatments had significantly greater overall analgesic effect (TOPAR8) compared with placebo (P < or 0.001). Patients who received etoricoxib 120 and 180 mg had significantly higher TOPAR8 scores than those who received etoricoxib 60 mg ( P < = 0.001) and ibuprofen (P < 0.05 etoricoxib 120 mg; P < or = 0.001 etoricoxib 180 mg). Least-squares mean TOPAR8 scores for etoricoxib 60, 120, 180, and 240 mg, ibuprofen, and placebo were 16.0, 22.0, 23.5, 20.7, 18.6, and 5.2, respectively. The median time to onset of analgesia was 24 minutes for etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg, and 30 minutes for etoricoxib 60 mg and ibuprofen. There were no significant differences in the onset of analgesia between etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg and ibuprofen. The duration of analgesic effect was >24 hours for etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg, and 12.1 hours for etoricoxib 60 mg. The duration of effect was significantly longer with all 4 etoricoxib doses compared with ibuprofen (10.1 hours; P < 0.05 etoricoxib 60 mg; < or = 0.001etoricoxib 120, 180, and 240 mg) and compared with placebo (2.1 hours; P < = 0.001). In the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis (n approximately 120), there was a linear relationship between plasma etoricoxib concentrations and pain relief scores up to the maximum observed concentration, followed by a decline in plasma concentrations with persistent analgesia. The most common adverse events were postextraction alveolitis and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: In this dose-ranging study, etoricoxib 120 mg was determined to be the minimum dose that had maximal efficacy in patients with moderate to severe acute pain associated with dental surgery. Both etoricoxib and ibuprofen were generally well tolerated.

Efficacy and tolerability profile of etoricoxib in patients with osteoarthritis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo and active-comparator controlled 12-week efficacy trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of 12 weeks of treatment with etoricoxib, a selective COX-2 inhibitor, in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee or hip. METHODS: In the 12-week placebo- and active comparator-controlled period of a randomized, double-blind study, eligible patients were treated with etoricoxib 60 mg once daily (n = 224), naproxen 500 mg twice daily (n = 221), or placebo (n = 56). Western Ontario McMaster's Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and physical function subscales and patient's global assessment of disease status were primary end points. Key secondary and other end points were patient's and investigator's global assessment of response to therapy, WOMAC stiffness subscale, investigator's global assessment of disease status, rescue paracetamol use, proportion of patients discontinuing due to lack of efficacy, and study joint tenderness. RESULTS: Etoricoxib 60 mg demonstrated efficacy significantly superior to placebo (p < or = 0.005) and comparable to naproxen 500 mg twice daily as assessed by the primary efficacy end points. Secondary and other end points confirmed these results. Treatment effects were evident by day 2, maximal by week 2, and sustained over the entire 12 weeks. Etoricoxib was well tolerated for 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Etoricoxib showed rapid and durable treatment effects in patients with OA of the knee or hip. Etoricoxib was generally well tolerated.

A randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study comparing the analgesic effect of etoricoxib to placebo, naproxen sodium, and acetaminophen with codeine using the dental impaction pain model.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the overall analgesic effect, including time to onset, peak and duration of effect for etoricoxib 120 mg, a new COX-2 selective inhibitor, in patients with acute pain to that of placebo. Naproxen sodium 550 mg and acetaminophen/codeine 600/60 mg were the active comparators. METHODS: A total of 201 patients with moderate to severe pain following surgical extraction of > or = 2 third molars, of which at least the mandibular tooth was impacted, were randomly allocated to receive single oral doses of placebo (n = 50), etoricoxib 120 mg (n = 50), naproxen sodium 550 mg (n = 51), or acetaminophen/codeine 600/60 mg (n = 50). The endpoints included total pain relief over 8 hours (TOPAR8, primary end point), sum of pain intensity difference over 8 hours, patient's global evaluation, onset, peak, and duration of analgesia. RESULTS: Etoricoxib 120 mg had a significantly greater least squares (LS) mean TOPAR8 score than placebo (20.9 vs 5.4; P < 0.001) and acetaminophen/codeine 600/60 mg (20.9 vs 11.5; P < 0.001), and a similar LS mean TOPAR8 score to naproxen sodium 550 mg (20.9 vs 21.3). All three active treatments had rapid onset of analgesia, median time approximately 30 minutes. The duration of analgesic effect, defined as median time to rescue medication use, was >24 hours for etoricoxib, 20.8 hours for naproxen sodium, 3.6 hours for acetaminophen/codeine, and 1.6 hours for placebo. DISCUSSION: Etoricoxib is a new COX-2 selective inhibitor under development for treatment of osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and acute pain. In this study, etoricoxib 120 mg provided rapid and long-lasting pain relief to patients with moderate-to-severe postdental surgery pain. Etoricoxib was generally well tolerated.

Mediators of galactose sensitivity in UDP-galactose 4'-epimerase-impaired mammalian cells.

UDP-galactose 4'-epimerase (GALE) catalyzes the final step in the Leloir pathway of galactose metabolism, interconverting UDP-galactose and UDP-glucose. Unlike its Escherichia coli counterpart, mammalian GALE also interconverts UDP-N-acetylgalactosamine and UDP-N-acetylglucosamine. Considering the key roles played by all four of these UDP-sugars in glycosylation, human GALE therefore not only contributes to the Leloir pathway, but also functions as a gatekeeper overseeing the ratios of important substrate pools required for the synthesis of glycosylated macromolecules. Defects in human GALE result in the disorder epimerase-deficiency galactosemia. To explore the relationship among GALE activity, substrate specificity, metabolic balance, and galactose sensitivity in mammalian cells, we employed a previously described GALE-null line of Chinese hamster ovary cells, ldlD. Using a transfection protocol, we generated ldlD derivative cell lines that expressed different levels of wild-type human GALE or E. coli GALE and compared the phenotypes and metabolic profiles of these lines cultured in the presence versus absence of galactose. We found that GALE-null cells accumulated abnormally high levels of Gal-1-P and UDP-Gal and abnormally low levels of UDP-Glc and UDP-GlcNAc in the presence of galactose and that human GALE expression corrected each of these defects. Comparing the human GALE- and E. coli GALE-expressing cells, we found that although GALE activity toward both substrates was required to restore metabolic balance, UDP-GalNAc activity was not required for cell proliferation in the presence of otherwise cytostatic concentrations of galactose. Finally, we found that uridine supplementation, which essentially corrected UDP-Glc and, to a lesser extent UDP-GlcNAc depletion, enabled ldlD cells to proliferate in the presence of galactose despite the continued accumulation of Gal-1-P and UDP-Gal. These data offer important insights into the mechanism of galactose sensitivity in epimerase-impaired cells and suggest a potential novel therapy for patients with epimerase-deficiency galactosemia.

Etoricoxib provides analgesic efficacy to patients after knee or hip replacement surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

UNLABELLED: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study we assessed the analgesic effect of etoricoxib (a new cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor) in patients having had knee or hip replacement surgery. A total of 228 patients with moderate or severe pain were randomly allocated within 72 h after surgery to receive etoricoxib 120 mg, controlled-release naproxen sodium 1100 mg, or placebo (1:1:1) on day 1 followed by etoricoxib and placebo (1:2) on days 2 to 7. Patients reported pain scores, rescue (opioid-combination) medication use, and the response to study drug. On day 1, etoricoxib provided an analgesic effect superior to placebo and similar to controlled-release naproxen sodium as demonstrated by the total pain relief score over 8 h, the primary end-point; least-squares mean scores were 11.0, 11.5, and 5.6, respectively (P < 0.001 versus placebo). Similarly, a larger percentage of patients receiving etoricoxib and naproxen sodium than those receiving placebo reported good to excellent responses to study drug: 53%, 60%, and 26% respectively. On days 2-7, etoricoxib demonstrated a significant reduction of rescue medication use, 35% (P < 0.001 versus placebo). The clinical relevance of the decrease was confirmed by Patient's Global Evaluation (P < 0.05 versus placebo). Patients receiving etoricoxib also experienced significantly less "worst" and "average" pain than did those on placebo. Etoricoxib was generally well tolerated in this study; the incidence of adverse experiences was infrequent and similar across treatment groups. In summary, etoricoxib provided analgesia that was similar to controlled-release naproxen sodium on day 1 and superior to placebo with reduced supplemental opioid use over 7 days. IMPLICATIONS: In a postsurgery setting (knee and hip replacements), etoricoxib 120 mg provided analgesia superior to placebo and similar to controlled-release naproxen sodium 1100 mg. Patients receiving etoricoxib suffered less pain and took less opioid rescue medication compared with patients on placebo.

Analgesic efficacy of etoricoxib in primary dysmenorrhea: results of a randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of etoricoxib in the treatment of primary dysmenorrhea. METHODS: Seventy-three women were randomly assigned to receive single oral doses of etoricoxib 120 mg, placebo, or naproxen sodium 550 mg at the onset of moderate to severe pain associated with menses. During 3 consecutive menstrual cycles in this double-blind, 3-period, crossover study, pain intensity and pain relief were assessed over the 24-hour period following dosing, and global ratings of therapy were made at 8 and 24 h after dosing. Tolerability was assessed by spontaneous reports of adverse experiences. RESULTS: Etoricoxib 120 mg provided analgesic efficacy superior to placebo for the primary endpoint, total pain relief over 8 h (TOPAR8, p<0.001), and for all secondary endpoints (p<0.050). The analgesic effect of etoricoxib 120 mg over the first 8 h was similar to that of naproxen sodium 550 mg. All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Etoricoxib 120 mg provided rapid and sustained analgesia that was superior to placebo and similar to that of naproxen sodium 550 mg.

Quality assurance of asthma clinical trials.

Accuracy and repeatability of spirometry measurements are essential to obtain reliable efficacy data in randomized asthma clinical trials. We report our experience with a centralized spirometry quality assurance program that we implemented in our phase III asthma trials. Six asthma trials of 4 to 21 weeks in duration were conducted at 232 clinical centers in 31 countries. Approximately 23,100 prebronchodilator and 13,700 postbronchodilator spirometry tests were collected from 2523 adult and 336 pediatric asthmatic patients. The program used a standard spirometer (the Renaissance spirometry system) with maneuver quality messages and automated quality grading of the spirometry tests. Each clinical center transmitted spirometry data weekly to a central database, where uniform monitoring of data quality was performed and feedback was provided in weekly quality reports. Seventy-nine percent of all patients performed spirometry sessions with quality that either met or exceeded American Thoracic Society standards and improved over time. Good-quality spirometry was associated with (1) less severe asthma; (2) active treatment; (3) infrequent nocturnal awakenings; (4) age above 15 years; and (5) low body weight. Maneuver-induced bronchospasm was rare. Good-quality spirometry was observed in multicenter asthma clinical trials that employed a standard spirometer and continuous monitoring. Both within- and between-patient variability decreased. Spirometry quality improved with time as study participants and technicians gained experience.

Randomised double blind trial of etoricoxib and indometacin in treatment of acute gouty arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of etoricoxib, a selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor, in comparison with indometacin in the treatment of acute gouty arthritis. DESIGN: Randomised, double blind, active comparator controlled trial. SETTING: 43 outpatient study centres in 11 countries. PARTICIPANTS: 142 men and eight women (75 patients per treatment group) aged 18 years or over presenting with clinically diagnosed acute gout within 48 hours of onset. INTERVENTIONS: Etoricoxib 120 mg administered orally once daily versus indometacin 50 mg administered orally three times daily, both for 8 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients' assessment of pain in the study joint over days 2 to 5 (primary end point); investigators' and patients' global assessments of response to treatment and tenderness of the study joint (key secondary end points). RESULTS: Etoricoxib showed efficacy comparable to indometacin. Patients' assessment of pain in the study joint (0-4 point Likert scale, "no pain" to "extreme pain") over days 2 to 5 showed a least squares mean change from baseline of -1.72 (95% confidence interval -1.90 to -1.55) for etoricoxib and -1.83 (-2.01 to -1.65) for indometacin. The difference between treatment groups met prespecified comparability criteria. All other efficacy end points, including those reflecting reduction in inflammation and analgesia, provided corroborative evidence of comparable efficacy. Significant pain relief was evident at the first measurement, 4 hours after the first dose of treatment. Prespecified safety analyses revealed that drug related adverse experiences occurred significantly less frequently with etoricoxib (22.7%) than with indometacin (46.7%) (P=0.003), although overall adverse experience rates were similar between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Etoricoxib 120 mg once daily provides rapid and effective treatment for acute gouty arthritis comparable to indometacin 50 mg three times daily. Etoricoxib was generally safe and well tolerated in this study.

Improvement of aspirin-intolerant asthma by montelukast, a leukotriene antagonist: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Leukotriene antagonists block the proinflammatory actions of leukotrienes (LT) and have been introduced as new treatments for asthma. Conventional therapy with glucocorticosteroids does not inhibit the biosynthesis of leukotrienes. We therefore tested whether addition of the leukotriene receptor antagonist montelukast was of therapeutic benefit in a group of aspirin-intolerant patients with asthma of whom 90% already were treated with moderate to high doses of glucocorticosteroids. Under double-blind conditions, 80 aspirin-intolerant patients with asthma were randomized to receive 4 wk oral treatment of either 10 mg of montelukast or placebo once daily at bedtime. Pulmonary function was measured as forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) once a week in the clinic and daily as morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR). Asthma symptoms and use of rescue bronchodilator were also recorded daily. Asthma specific quality of life (QoL) was assessed before and after the treatments. The group receiving montelukast showed a remarkable improvement of their asthma, whereas the group given placebo showed no change. Thus, from equal baseline values, the mean difference between the groups over the 4-wk treatment period was 10.2% for FEV(1) and 28.0 L for morning PEFR (p for both < 0.001). The improved pulmonary function in the group receiving montelukast occurred at the same time as 27% less bronchodilator was used (p < 0.05), and it was associated with fewer asthma symptoms than in the group given placebo, including 1.3 nights more of sleep per week and 54% fewer asthma exacerbations (p < 0.05). There was also an improvement in asthma-specific QoL (p < 0.05). The therapeutic response to montelukast was consistent across patients with different baseline characteristics and did not correlate with baseline urinary LTE(4). Addition of a leukotriene receptor antagonist such as montelukast improves asthma in aspirin-intolerant patients over and above what can be achieved by glucocorticosteroids.