Efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler: randomized controlled trial comparing once- and twice-daily dosing in patients with asthma.

Asthma guidelines recommend titrating maintenance medications to the lowest effective dose. This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of reducing the frequency of dosing in patients previously controlled with twice-daily budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FM) pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) to once-daily regimens of BUD/FM pMDI or BUD pMDI. This was a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo (PBO)/active-controlled, multicenter study (N = 752) of patients aged > or =16 years with mild to moderate asthma. After 4-5 weeks on single-blind BUD/FM pMDI 160/9 micrograms twice daily (320/18 micrograms daily), patients with stable asthma received BUD/FM pMDI 160/9 micrograms twice daily (320/18 micrograms daily; morning and evening), BUD/FM pMDI 320/9 micrograms once daily (evening), BUD/FM pMDI 160/9 micrograms once daily (evening), BUD pMDI 320 micrograms once daily (evening), or PBO. BUD/FM (once or twice daily) was more effective (p < or = 0.003) than BUD and PBO on evening peak expiratory flow (primary variable), morning pulmonary function assessments, daily symptoms, and nighttime rescue medication use. Twice-daily BUD/FM was more effective (p < or = 0.05) than both once-daily doses for evening pulmonary function assessments and daytime rescue medication use. All treatments were well tolerated. Once- or twice-daily BUD/FM showed better efficacy than BUD once daily or PBO; results generally were more favorable with twice-daily dosing compared with both once-daily dosing regimens, which had one-half the daily FM dose.

Bronchodilation of formoterol administered with budesonide: device and formulation effects.

BACKGROUND: Previous single-dose crossover studies have established therapeutic equivalence of formoterol when administered at the same nominal dose via a dry powder inhaler (DPI) or pressurized hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) metered-dose inhaler (pMDI). Demonstration of equivalent bronchodilation for formoterol administered as formoterol DPI or combined with budesonide in one pMDI (budesonide/formoterol pMDI) would indicate that the greater clinical efficacy of the budesonide/formoterol pMDI combination is due to the budesonide contribution and not to differences in formoterol formulation or delivery device. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the formoterol-related bronchodilatory effects of formoterol DPI and budesonide/formoterol pMDI are similar, despite formoterol formulation and delivery device differences. METHODS: This was a multicenter, open-label, five-period crossover study conducted in 201 adult patients with stable asthma. The study included a screening visit, a 7- to 14-day run-in period, during which patients were treated with budesonide pMDI (80 microg per inhalation, two inhalations twice daily), and a randomized treatment period that included five single-day treatment periods, during which patients received single-dose crossover treatments, each of which was separated by a 3- to 14-day washout period. Patients were randomized to five of seven single-dose treatments (one, two, or four inhalations of budesonide/formoterol pMDI 80/4.5 microg; four inhalations of budesonide pMDI 80 microg plus one, two, or four inhalations of formoterol DPI 4.5 microg; or four inhalations of budesonide pMDI 80 microg alone). At clinic visits, the budesonide pMDI dose was coordinated with the budesonide dose delivered via the budesonide/formoterol pMDI such that all patients received a 320-microg dose of budesonide. The primary variable was average forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) from the area under the curve divided by time from 12-h serial spirometry. RESULTS: Average 12-h FEV1 values were similar, regardless of delivery device, among treatments with the same nominal formoterol doses and dose-ordered within each device; mean FEV1 values were significantly higher for treatments containing formoterol versus budesonide alone. The formoterol dose potency ratio for budesonide/formoterol pMDI:formoterol DPI (0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.27) demonstrated clinical equivalence in bronchodilation at the same formoterol dose. CONCLUSION: Budesonide/formoterol pMDI affords equivalent formoterol-related bronchodilatory effects versus formoterol DPI at formoterol doses of 4.5, 9, and 18 microg, indicating that practitioners can expect and patients will experience similar bronchodilation from the same dose of formoterol whether it is delivered as monotherapy via a DPI or as combination therapy with budesonide via one pMDI.

Early bronchodilatory effects of budesonide/formoterol pMDI compared with fluticasone/salmeterol DPI and albuterol pMDI: 2 randomized controlled trials in adults with persistent asthma previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids.

Two identically designed, randomized, multicenter, single-dose, crossover studies were conducted in patients aged > or = 18 years with mild to moderate asthma previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids. After 2 weeks on twice-daily budesonide pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) 160 microg, patients received a randomized sequence of budesonide/formoterol pMDI 80/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (160/9 microg), fluticasone/salmeterol dry powder inhaler (DPI) 250/50 microg x 1 inhalation, albuterol pMDI 90 microg x 2 inhalations (180 microg), and placebo pMDI (3-to 14-day washout periods). Improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) at 3 minutes were significantly (p < 0.001) greater after treatment with budesonide/formoterol pMDI compared with fluticasone/salmeterol DPI and similar to that of albuterol pMDI. In addition, significantly (p < 0.001) more patients treated with budesonide/formoterol pMDI achieved a 15% improvement in FEV(1) within 15 minutes compared with patients treated with fluticasone/salmeterol DPI and placebo. Thus, the early bronchodilatory effects of budesonide/formoterol pMDI were greater than with fluticasone/salmeterol DPI.

Twelve-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter study of the efficacy and tolerability of budesonide and formoterol in one metered-dose inhaler compared with budesonide alone and formoterol alone in adolescents and adults with asthma.

BACKGROUND: The addition of the long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonist formoterol to low- to moderate-dose budesonide has shown clinical efficacy in patients with persistent asthma. Combination therapy with budesonide/formoterol in 1 pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) has been found to have greater efficacy than its monocomponents in patients with moderate to severe persistent asthma, but it has not been assessed in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of budesonide and formoterol delivered via 1 pMDI (budesonide/formoterol pMDI), budesonide pMDI, formoterol dry powder inhaler (DPI), and placebo. METHODS: This 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-dummy study was conducted at 56 centers across the United States. Patients aged > or =12 years with mild to moderate persistent asthma treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) for > or =4 weeks before screening and who had a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) of > or =60% to < or =90% of predicted normal at screening were eligible. After 2 weeks (current asthma therapy discontinued), patients received twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI 80/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (160/9 microg), budesonide pMDI 80 microg x 2 inhalations (160 microg), formoterol DPI 4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (9 microg), or placebo. The coprimary efficacy variables were changes from baseline in morning predose FEV(1) and 12-hour mean FEV(1) (from serial spirometry) after administration of the morning dose of study medication. Tolerability was assessed based on adverse events (AEs); routine laboratory assessments; electrocardiography; 24-hour Holter monitor assessments; and physical examinations, including vital signs (eg, systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate). AEs were recorded manually by the patient in paper notebooks and reviewed at each clinic visit by the investigator and during a final follow-up phone call. RESULTS: A total of 480 patients were randomized (299 females, 181 males; mean age, 36 years; mean FEV(1), 2.4 L; budesonide/formoterol pMDI, 123 patients; budesonide pMDI, 121; formoterol DPI, 114; placebo, 122). At end of treatment, the mean increases from baseline in predose FEV(1) were greater with budesonide/formoterol pMDI versus budesonide pMDI, formoterol DPI, and placebo (0.37 vs 0.23, 0.17, and 0.03 L, respectively; all, P<0.005). 0.005). After administration of the first dose and at weeks 2 and 12, mean increases in 12-hour mean FEV(1) were significantly greater with budesonide/formoterol pMDI (0.41, 0.47, and 0.50 L, respectively) versus budesonide pMDI (0.17, 0.30, and 0.32 L) and placebo (0.15, 0.12, and 0.12 L) (all, P < 0.001). Fewer patients receiving budesonide/formoterol pMDI met criteria for (18.7%; P < 0.001) or withdrew because of (7.3%; P < or = 0.010) worsening asthma versus formoterol DPI (42.1% and 18.4%, respectively) and placebo (56.6% and 32.8%); results were similar between budesonide pMDI (21.5% and 6.6%, respectively) and budesonide/formoterol pMDI. Three patients experienced serious AEs; none was considered related to study medication. The proportions of withdrawals due to worsening asthma were not significantly different between the budesonide/formoterol pMDI and budesonide pMDI groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this population of adults and adolescents with mild to moderate persistent asthma previously treated with ICSs, twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI was associated with significantly increased pulmonary function versus its monocomponents. All study drugs were generally well tolerated.

Design of the PF-ILD trial: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase III trial of nintedanib in patients with progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease.

600 patients aged ≥18 years will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to nintedanib or placebo. Patients with diagnosis of IPF will be excluded. The study population will be enriched with two-thirds having a usual interstitial pneumonia-like pattern on HRCT. The primary endpoint is the annual rate of decline in forced vital capacity over 52 weeks. The main secondary endpoints are the absolute change from baseline in King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease Questionnaire total score, time to first acute interstitial lung disease exacerbation or death and time to all-cause mortality over 52 weeks. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, the International Conference on Harmonisation Tripartite Guideline for Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and Japanese GCP regulations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02999178.

Long-term safety and asthma control with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide pressurized metered-dose inhaler in asthma patients.

Safety concerns have been raised regarding the regular use of long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonists (LABAs) alone or with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). The purpose of this study was to examine the long-term safety of budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI). This 52-week, double-blind study (SD-039-0728; n=708) included patients >or=12 years of age with moderate to severe persistent asthma previously receiving ICSs. After 2 weeks on budesonide pMDI 320 microg twice daily (b.i.d.), patients were randomized 3:1:1 overall to budesonide/formoterol pMDI 640/18 microg b.i.d., budesonide/formoterol pMDI 320/9 microg b.i.d., or budesonide pMDI 640 microg b.i.d. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar across the groups. Drug-related AEs (>or=2% overall) were oral candidiasis, tremor, and pharyngolaryngeal pain. No clinically meaningful differences in laboratory, electrocardiogram, or Holter monitor variables were observed. The percentage of patients with >or=1 asthma exacerbation was significantly lower (p=0.006) with budesonide/formoterol 640/18 (12.2%) and numerically lower with budesonide/formoterol 320/9 (14.4%) versus budesonide (21.8%). The number of asthma exacerbations per patient-treatment year was lower with budesonide/formoterol 640/18 (0.174; p=0.004) and budesonide/formoterol 320/9 (0.185; p=0.049) versus budesonide (0.315). Improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second and diary variables were significantly greater (p<0.001) with both budesonide/formoterol doses versus budesonide. Budesonide/formoterol 640/18 and 320/9 microg b.i.d. showed an acceptable safety profile relative to budesonide, with no significant or unexpected patterns of abnormalities observed by adding a LABA to budesonide for up to 1 year in this patient population. Improvements in asthma control were shown with both doses of budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide.