Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
J Allergy Clin Immunol ; 145(6): 1529-1534, 2020 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32081759

RESUMEN

Asthma is a severe and chronic disabling disease affecting more than 300 million people worldwide. Although in the past few drugs for the treatment of asthma were available, new treatment options are currently emerging, which appear to be highly effective in certain subgroups of patients. Accordingly, there is a need for biomarkers that allow selection of patients for refined and personalized treatment strategies. Recently, serological chip tests based on microarrayed allergen molecules and peptides derived from the most common rhinovirus strains have been developed, which may discriminate 2 of the most common forms of asthma, that is, allergen- and virus-triggered asthma. In this perspective, we argue that classification of patients with asthma according to these common trigger factors may open new possibilities for personalized management of asthma.


Asunto(s)
Alérgenos/inmunología , Asma/inmunología , Animales , Asma/metabolismo , Biomarcadores/metabolismo , Humanos , Medicina de Precisión/métodos , Rhinovirus/inmunología
2.
Respirology ; 18(5): 866-73, 2013 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23551359

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The efficacy and tolerability of budesonide/formoterol versus formoterol in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was evaluated. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, phase III study (NCT01069289), patients with moderate to severe COPD for ≥2 years received either budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 µg two inhalations twice daily via Turbuhaler® or formoterol 4.5 µg two inhalations twice daily via Turbuhaler® for 12 weeks. Salbutamol was available as reliever medication. Primary outcome variable: change from baseline to average during treatment in pre-dose forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1 ). RESULTS: One thousand two hundred ninety-three patients were randomized (budesonide/formoterol n = 636; formoterol n = 657). Both budesonide/formoterol and formoterol increased pre-dose FEV1 versus baseline (improvements of 4.6% and 1.5% over baseline, respectively), with the increase from baseline being significantly greater with budesonide/formoterol versus formoterol (budesonide/formoterol:formoterol ratio 1.032; 95% confidence interval: 1.013-1.052; P = 0.0011). The budesonide/formoterol group had a significantly prolonged time to first exacerbation versus the formoterol group (hazard ratio: 0.679; 95% confidence interval: 0.507-0.909; P = 0.0094) and significantly greater improvements in many secondary outcome measures. Both treatments were well tolerated; the incidence and type of adverse events were similar: most commonly reported (budesonide/formoterol vs formoterol): COPD (8.0% vs 9.4%) and nasopharyngitis (5.5% vs 4.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 µg two inhalations twice daily was effective and well tolerated in patients with moderate to severe COPD, offering benefits over formoterol alone in terms of improved lung function and reduced risk of exacerbation.


Asunto(s)
Budesonida/uso terapéutico , Etanolaminas/uso terapéutico , Nebulizadores y Vaporizadores/clasificación , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Administración por Inhalación , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Broncodilatadores/administración & dosificación , Broncodilatadores/efectos adversos , Broncodilatadores/uso terapéutico , Budesonida/administración & dosificación , Budesonida/efectos adversos , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Método Doble Ciego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Etanolaminas/administración & dosificación , Etanolaminas/efectos adversos , Femenino , Volumen Espiratorio Forzado/fisiología , Fumarato de Formoterol , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Vaccine ; 26(19): 2378-88, 2008 05 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18407382

RESUMEN

A multicentre, randomized, phase III clinical trial in 5071 healthy adults was conducted to evaluate the safety and reactogenicity of a 15 microg HA dose of a candidate oil-in-water emulsion-based adjuvant system (AS)-adjuvanted split-virion H5N1 (AS-H5N1) vaccine compared to a licensed seasonal influenza vaccine, Fluarix.(1) Stringent criteria were used to evaluate adverse events and reactogenicity profile. Overall, 96.7% of the 5071 vaccinated subjects completed the study. Significantly more participants in the AS-H5N1 vaccine group reported general or local adverse events. Pain was the most common symptom in both treatment groups. Less than 1% of subjects withdrew from the study due to adverse events and no withdrawals were due to serious adverse events related to vaccination. The safety and reactogenicity profile of the AS-H5N1 candidate vaccine can be considered clinically acceptable in the context of its use against pandemic influenza.


Asunto(s)
Adyuvantes Inmunológicos/efectos adversos , Subtipo H5N1 del Virus de la Influenza A/inmunología , Vacunas contra la Influenza/efectos adversos , Adyuvantes Inmunológicos/administración & dosificación , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Emulsiones/administración & dosificación , Emulsiones/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Gripe Humana/virología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA