Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effectiveness of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol on asthma control in the Salford Lung Study.
Jacques, Loretta; Bakerly, Nawar Diar; New, John P; Svedsater, Henrik; Lay-Flurrie, James; Leather, David A.
Afiliação
  • Jacques L; a Respiratory Research & Development, GSK , Uxbridge , Middlesex , UK.
  • Bakerly ND; b Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust , Salford , UK.
  • New JP; c Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, The University of Manchester , Manchester , UK.
  • Svedsater H; b Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust , Salford , UK.
  • Lay-Flurrie J; d NorthWest EHealth , Salford , UK.
  • Leather DA; e Value Evidence & Outcomes, GSK , Brentford , Middlesex , UK.
J Asthma ; 56(7): 748-757, 2019 07.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29972089
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

The Asthma Salford Lung Study demonstrated the effectiveness of initiating once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) versus continuing usual care in asthma patients in UK primary care [ 1 ]. Here, we report a secondary analysis in a subset of patients with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/Salm) as their baseline intended maintenance therapy, to evaluate the relative effectiveness of initiating FF/VI versus continuing FP/Salm.

METHODS:

Adults with symptomatic asthma were randomised to initiate FF/VI 100[200]/25 µg or continue FP/Salm. The Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Asthma questionnaire, severe exacerbations, salbutamol inhaler prescriptions and serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded throughout the 12-month treatment period.

RESULTS:

One thousand two hundred and sixty-four patients (FF/VI 646; FP/Salm 618) were included in this subset analysis; 978 had baseline ACT score <20 and were included in the primary effectiveness analysis (PEA) population. At week 24, odds of patients being ACT responders (total score ≥20 and/or improvement from baseline ≥3) were significantly higher with FF/VI versus FP/Salm (71% vs. 56%; odds ratio 2.03 [95% CI 1.53, 2.68]; p < 0.001 [PEA]). Significant benefit with FF/VI versus FP/Salm was also observed for AQLQ responders, activity impairment due to asthma, exacerbation rates, and salbutamol inhalers prescribed. No significant between-group differences were observed for impairment while working or work absenteeism due to asthma.

CONCLUSIONS:

For patients in primary care, initiating FF/VI was significantly better than continuing with FP/Salm for improving asthma control and quality of life, and reducing asthma exacerbations, with no notable difference in SAEs. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01706198.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Asma / Álcoois Benzílicos / Broncodilatadores / Clorobenzenos / Combinação Fluticasona-Salmeterol / Androstadienos Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Asthma Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Asma / Álcoois Benzílicos / Broncodilatadores / Clorobenzenos / Combinação Fluticasona-Salmeterol / Androstadienos Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Asthma Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido