Comparison of the effects of intravenous and oral montelukast on airway function: a double blind, placebo controlled, three period, crossover study in asthmatic patients.

BACKGROUND: Montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, improves parameters of asthma control including forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) when given orally to patients aged six years or older. This study was undertaken to compare the effect on FEV(1) of intravenous and oral montelukast and placebo during the 24 hour period following administration. METHODS: Fifty one asthmatic patients (FEV(1) 40-80% predicted and > or =15% improvement after inhaled beta agonist) were enrolled in a double blind, single dose, three period, crossover study to receive intravenous montelukast (7 mg), oral montelukast (10 mg), or placebo in a randomised fashion. The primary end point was area under the curve (AUC)(0-24 h) of the percentage change from baseline in FEV(1). Additional end points were maximum percentage change in FEV(1) and percentage change at different time points. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, intravenous and oral montelukast significantly increased the AUC(0-24 h) (means of 20.70%, 15.72%, and 7.75% for intravenous, oral and placebo, respectively; no statistical difference between intravenous and oral). The difference in least square means from placebo for intravenous montelukast was 13.27% (95% CI 7.07 to 19.46), p<0.001 and for oral montelukast was 7.44% (95% CI 1.20 to 13.68), p = 0.020. The maximum percentage change in FEV(1) was not significantly different for intravenous and oral montelukast (difference in least square means 6.78% (95% CI -0.59 to 14.15), p = 0.071). The mean percentage change in FEV(1) for intravenous montelukast was greater than for oral montelukast within the first hour (15.02% vs 4.67% at 15 min, p< or =0.001; 18.43% vs 12.90% at one hour, p<0.001 for intravenous and oral montelukast, respectively (placebo 3.05% at 15 minutes, 7.33% at one hour). Intravenous and oral montelukast were similar to placebo in the frequency of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The onset of action for intravenous montelukast was faster than for oral montelukast and the improvement in airway function lasted over the 24 hour observation period for both treatments. Although not well understood, there was a trend toward a greater improvement in FEV(1) with intravenous than with oral montelukast. These findings suggest that leukotriene receptor antagonists should be investigated as a treatment for acute severe asthma.

Proventil HFA prevents exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in children.

Short-acting inhaled beta2-agonists used just prior to exercise are an effective method for preventing exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) in children. This was a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, four-period crossover study that compared the effectiveness of albuterol formulated in hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA) to albuterol formulated in chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and to placebo in protecting asthmatic children age 6-11 from EIB. Patients self-administered either HFA albuterol, two different CFC albuterol products, or placebo 30 min prior to exercise challenge. Spirometry was performed predose and 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, and 90 min after the exercise challenge was completed. The smallest percent change from the predose forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) after exercise challenge was similar for the three active treatments, and each of the active treatments was significantly better than placebo. Each active treatment had significantly fewer patients unprotected from EIB (unprotected defined as having >20% fall in FEV1 after exercise challenge) than placebo. Changes in heart rate, blood pressure and electrocardiogram (ECG) intervals were similar for the three active treatments following exercise. HFA albuterol is as effective as albuterol products formulated in CFCs and more effective than placebo in protecting asthmatic children from EIB.

Therapeutic equivalence of Spiros dry powder inhaler and Ventolin metered dose inhaler. A bioassay using methacholine.

Because chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) contribute to depletion of stratospheric ozone, CFC-containing metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) such as Ventolin and Proventil are being phased out of production. In terms of delivery of albuterol to the lungs, we compared an alternative delivery system, the Spiros dry-powder inhaler (DPI), with Ventolin, using a methacholine challenge-based clinical bioassay. Twenty-four adults and adolescents with asthma completed this double-blind, four-period crossover study. Doses evaluated were one and three actuations each of Spiros and Ventolin (90- and 270-microgram albuterol base). A methacholine challenge (Cockcroft method) was initiated 3 h before and 0.25 h after albuterol. Predose PC(20)FEV(1) values were not significantly different between study days. Postdose PC(20)FEV(1) results met standard bioassay study validity criteria: i.e., a significant dose-response relationship was present (p = 0.0002); tests for deviation from parallelism and overlap of dose-response curves were nonsignificant (p = 0.08, 0.69). By using Finney 2-by-2 bioassay analysis, we estimate that each Spiros actuation delivers 1.12 times as much albuterol to the airways as one Ventolin actuation (90% confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.94). There were no significant differences in markers of systemic effects (vital signs, potassium, and blood glucose concentrations). We conclude that Spiros and Ventolin inhalers deliver comparable quantities of albuterol to the airways.

A dose-ranging study of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray in children with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate aqueous nasal spray (MFNS; Nasonex) 200 microg once daily for the treatment and prophylaxis of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and treatment of perennial rhinitis have been demonstrated in adults. However, the dose response of MFNS in pediatric patients has not yet been characterized. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to determine the dose-response relationship of 3 different doses of MFNS in a pediatric population. METHODS: This was a multicenter, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled study of 679 children 6 to 11 years of age with histories of SAR and documented positive skin test responses. Patients were randomized to one of the following treatment groups for 4 weeks: MFNS 25 microgram once daily, MFNS 100 microgram once daily, MFNS 200 microgram once daily, beclomethasone dipropionate 84 microgram twice daily (168 microgram/day), or placebo. Physician evaluations were performed at days 4, 8, 15, and 29, and patient evaluations were analyzed for days 1 to 15 and 16 to 29. RESULTS: The mean reduction from baseline in physician-evaluated total nasal symptom scores at day 8 (the primary efficacy variable) was significantly greater in the MFNS and beclomethasone dipropionate groups than in the placebo group (P

Correlation of cat-hair (Fel d1) prick skin test to airway response using a live-cat-room challenge model.

The purpose of this study was to document the relationship between prick skin test, airway, and common allergy symptom responses to natural cat exposure. Twenty-nine volunteers with a history of cat-hair allergy and asthma were recruited. Subjects had spirometry and prick skin test with Fel d1 on Visit 1. On Visit 2, subjects had a live-cat-room challenge with airway responses and allergy symptoms monitored. All 29 subjects had a positive skin test (wheal > or = 4 mm), but only 12 (41%) had a positive airway response (fall in FEV1 > or = 15%). There was no significant correlation between the fall in FEV1 and wheal size. All symptom scores increased significantly from baseline, but the change was not significantly related to wheal size. In summary, prick skin test response is not a good predictor of airway response or changes in allergy symptoms using the live-cat-room challenge model.

Montelukast once daily inhibits exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in 6- to 14-year-old children with asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, attenuates exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) in 6- to 14-year-old children with asthma. STUDY DESIGN: Double-blind, multicenter, 2-period crossover study. Children (n = 27) with forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) > or =70% of the predicted value and a fall in FEV1 > or =20% after exercise on 2 occasions. Patients received montelukast (5-mg chewable tablet) or placebo once daily in the evening for 2 days in crossover fashion (at least 4 days between treatment periods). Standardized exercise challenges were performed 20 to 24 hours after the last dose in each period. End points included area above the postexercise percent fall in FEV1 versus time curve (AAC0-60 min), maximum percent fall in FEV1 from pre-exercise baseline, and time to recovery of FEV1 to within 5% of pre-exercise baseline. RESULTS: Montelukast significantly reduced AAC0-60 min (265 vs 590% x min for montelukast and placebo, respectively, P < or = .05; approximately 59% protection relative to placebo) and the maximum percent fall (18% vs 26% for montelukast and placebo, respectively, P < or = .05). Montelukast treatment resulted in a shorter time to recovery (18 vs 28 minutes for montelukast and placebo, respectively, P = .079). CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast attenuates EIB at the end of the dosing interval in 6- to 14-year-old children with asthma.

Effect of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray versus oral prednisone on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

BACKGROUND: Fluticasone propionate is a glucocorticoid with negligible oral bioavailability and very low intranasal bioavailability that is used as an intranasal spray for the treatment of rhinitis. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA)axis effects of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (FP ANS) compared with oral prednisone and placebo by using a 6-hour cosyntropin infusion test. METHODS: In a 4-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled parallel-group study, 105 adult patients with allergic rhinitis were randomly assigned to receive FP ANS 200 microg once daily, FP ANS 400 microg twice daily, oral prednisone 7.5 mg once daily, oral prednisone 15 mg once daily, or placebo. HPA-axis function was assessed at the screening visit and after 4 weeks of treatment by measuring morning plasma cortisol concentrations and poststimulation concentrations of plasma and urinary cortisol. RESULTS: There was no evidence of altered HPA-axis response to cosyntropin by the end of treatment with FP ANS 200 microg once daily or FP ANS 400 microg twice daily when compared with placebo. In contrast, 4 weeks of treatment with oral prednisone 7.5 or 15 mg once daily was associated with significant (p < 0.05 vs placebo) reduction in HPA-axis function, as evidenced by lower plasma cortisol concentrations (area under the plasma concentration-time curve and peak concentrations) after cosyntropin stimulation and reduced mean 24-hour urinary cortisol excretion. FP ANS 400 microg twice daily and both prednisone regimens were associated with a significant (p < 0.05 vs placebo) reduction in mean morning plasma cortisol concentrations. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that a 4-week course of FP ANS at four times the recommended dose does not suppress adrenal function in response to a 6-hour cosyntropin stimulation test.

Montelukast, a once-daily leukotriene receptor antagonist, in the treatment of chronic asthma: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial. Montelukast Clinical Research Study Group.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical effect of oral montelukast sodium, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, in asthmatic patients aged 15 years or more. DESIGN: Randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. A 2-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period was followed by a 12-week, double-blind treatment period (montelukast sodium, 10 mg, or matching placebo, once daily at bedtime) and a 3-week, double-blind, washout period. SETTING/PATIENTS: Fifty clinical centers randomly allocated 681 patients with chronic, stable asthma to receive placebo or montelukast after demonstrating a forced expiratory volume in 1 second 50% to 85% of the predicted value, at least a 15% improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (absolute value) after inhaled beta-agonist administration, a minimal predefined level of daytime asthma symptoms, and inhaled beta-agonist use. Twenty-three percent of the patients used concomitant inhaled corticosteroids. PRIMARY END POINTS: Forced expiratory volume in 1 second and daytime asthma symptoms. RESULTS: Montelukast improved airway obstruction (forced expiratory volume in 1 second, morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate) and patient-reported end points (daytime asthma symptoms, "as-needed" beta-agonist use, nocturnal awakenings) (P<.001 compared with placebo). Montelukast provided near-maximal effect in these end points within the first day of treatment. Tolerance and rebound worsening of asthma did not occur. Montelukast improved outcome end points, including asthma exacerbations, asthma control days (P<.001 compared with placebo), and decreased peripheral blood eosinophil counts (P<.001 compared with placebo). The incidence of adverse events and discontinuations from therapy were similar in the montelukast and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast, compared with placebo, significantly improved asthma control during a 12-week treatment period. Montelukast was generally well tolerated, with an adverse event profile comparable with that of placebo.

Proventil HFA provides protection from exercise-induced bronchoconstriction comparable to proventil and ventolin.

INTRODUCTION: During the 1970s, scientists suggested that the growing use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) was contributing to depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer with potentially harmful results. A committee on the ozone layer organized the preparation of the Montreal Protocol. This protocol mandated the cessation of production and use of CFCs by January 1, 1996. The primary exemption to this ban is for the use of CFCs as propellants in metered dose inhalers (MDIs) for the treatment of asthma. Suitable replacement hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) propellants, such as HFA-134a, for use in MDIs have been identified. Albuterol, a selective beta-adrenergic agonist, currently widely available for inhalation asthma therapy, has been reformulated in HFA-134a (Proventil HFA). OBJECTIVE; To compare the efficacy of Proventil HFA to Ventolin, Proventil, and placebo (HFA-134a) MDI in protecting asthmatic patients from exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. METHODS: This was a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, 4-period crossover study of asthmatic patients with documented exercise-induced broncho-constriction. Twenty patients self administered two puffs of either Proventil HFA, Ventolin, Proventil or placebo, from an MDI, 30 minutes prior to performing a standardized exercise challenge at the study site. Spirometry was performed predose and 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, and 90 minutes after completion of the exercise challenge. Heart rate and blood pressure were measured just prior to spirometry and a 12-lead ECG was performed 15 minutes after completion of the exercise challenge for measurement of the QT corrected interval. RESULTS: The primary efficacy variable was the smallest percent change from the predose FEV1 following exercise. The smallest percent change from predose FEV1 for Proventil HFA was 2.0 +/- 9.9 SD, similar to the 2.0 +/- 11.4 SD for Ventolin, and the 3.6 +/- 10.2 SD for Proventil. The smallest percent change from predose FEV1 for each of the active treatments was significantly different from placebo, -23.7 +/- 14.5. Twelve of the patients had a > or = 20% fall in FEV1 post-exercise with placebo pretreatment, but only 1, 1, and 0 had > or = 20% FEV1 falls after treatment with Proventil HFA, Ventolin, and Proventil respectively. Changes in heart rate, blood pressure and QT corrected interval were similar for the three active treatments following exercise. CONCLUSIONS: Proventil HFA provides protection against exercise-induced bronchoconstriction comparable to Ventolin and Proventil and protection superior to placebo. Proventil HFA has a safety profile similar to Ventolin when used to prevent exercise-induced bronchoconstriction.

Use of an anti-IgE humanized monoclonal antibody in ragweed-induced allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Increased serum levels of antigen-specific IgE are often associated with allergic respiratory disorders. RhuMAb-E25, a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody, decreases free serum IgE by forming biologically inactive immune complexes with free IgE. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that rhuMAb-E25 would decrease total serum IgE and reduce symptoms. METHODS: Two hundred forty subjects were enrolled into five groups to determine the safety, tolerance, and efficacy of repeated administration of rhuMAb-E25 in adults with ragweed-induced allergic rhinitis and to explore the pharmacodynamic relationship of rhuMAb-E25 and IgE. One hundred eighty-one subjects received an initial intravenous loading dose (day 0, 1 month before ragweed season), followed by administration of rhuMAb-E25 (in mg/kg body weight) of 0.15 mg/kg subcutaneously, 0.15 mg/kg intravenously, or 0.5 mg/kg intravenously on days 7, 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, and 84. A subcutaneous placebo group and an intravenous placebo group were included. The total evaluation time included the 84-day treatment period, followed by a 42-day observation period. RESULTS: Adverse events were mild, and no differences were observed in the rates between the three active and two placebo treatment groups. Ragweed-specific IgE levels correlated with symptom scores. RhuMAb-E25 decreased serum free IgE levels in a dose- and baseline IgE-dependent fashion. However, only 11 subjects had IgE levels that were suppressed to undetectable levels (< or = 24 ng/ml), a sample too small to demonstrate significant differences and clinical efficacy. Thus the case for efficacy was not proven. Nonetheless, the study confirms that it is safe to repeatedly administer rhuMAb-E25 over a period of months. CONCLUSIONS: Because rhuMAb-E25 decreased serum free IgE in a dose-dependent fashion and because symptom scores correlated with antigen-specific IgE levels, the results suggest that if given in adequate doses, rhuMAb-E25 should be an effective therapy for allergic diseases.

Zolpidem in the treatment of short-term insomnia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Zolpidem was evaluated in this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study for efficacy and safety in patients with short-term insomnia related to problems with work, marriage, family, or financial matters. One hundred and thirty-eight patients ranging in age from 20 to 55 years were evaluated for safety. Of these, 136 patients were included in the analysis of efficacy. Patients received zolpidem 10 mg or placebo nightly for 7-10 nights. Patients completed a morning questionnaire daily, reported their global impressions of therapy, and completed a Profile of Mood States (POMS) at the start and end of the study. Nine patients (three zolpidem and six placebo) discontinued before completing the study; three (one zolpidem and two placebo) due to adverse events. Compared to placebo, zolpidem significantly reduced subjective latency to sleep on all nights of treatment and patients rated that falling asleep was easier with zolpidem than with placebo (p < 0.01) throughout the study. Compared to placebo, the zolpidem-treated patients reported longer total sleep time, fewer awakenings after sleep onset, shorter time spent awake after sleep onset and better quality of sleep. All of these differences were significant during at least part of the study. No morning sleepiness or impairment in the ability to concentrate were recorded among patients taking zolpidem. Each item on the patient's global impression of zolpidem therapy was rated significantly better than that of placebo. No changes in mood (including anxiety) were detected using the POMS scale. Side effects occurred with a similar frequency in the zolpidem and placebo groups. Zolpidem was found to be more effective than placebo and was well tolerated in the management of stress-induced short-term insomnia.

Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray compared with terfenadine tablets in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Comparative studies with topical corticosteroids and antihistamines for treatment of allergic rhinitis have not always demonstrated clear distinctions between the two on the basis of therapeutic efficacy. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray with those of terfenadine in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: Three hundred forty-eight patients with allergic rhinitis were given fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (200 micrograms once daily), terfenadine tablets (60 mg twice daily), or placebo for 4 weeks in a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study. RESULTS: Clinician-rated total nasal symptom scores after 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks of therapy and patient-rated total nasal symptom scores throughout treatment were significantly (p <0.05) lower in the fluticasone propionate group compared with the terfenadine group or the placebo group. Terfenadine was not statistically different from placebo on the basis of clinician-related nasal symptom scores, except for sneezing. Total nasal airflow, measured by rhinomanometry, significantly (p <0.05) improved in the fluticasone propionate group compared with the terfenadine group or the placebo group. More fluticasone propionate-treated patients compared with placebo-treated patients had reduced nasal mucosal eosinophil counts after 4 weeks of therapy (p <0.05). No serious or unusual drug-related adverse events were reported. Morning plasma cortisol concentrations after 4 weeks of therapy did not differ among groups. CONCLUSION: Fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray is more effective than terfenadine tablets for treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Safety and efficacy of azelastine nasal spray (Astelin NS) for seasonal allergic rhinitis: a 4-week comparative multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: Azelastine is a chemically novel investigational antiallergy drug with the ability to antagonize the effects of chemical mediators of the early- phase and late phase allergic responses suggesting its usefulness in the treatment of upper and lower airway diseases. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this 4-week, double- bind, multicenter trial was to evaluate the efficacy of azelastine nasal spray in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis. METHODS: Two hundred sixty-four subjects 12 years of age and older were randomized to receive either azelastine, 2 sprays/nostril qd; azelastine, 2 sprays/nostril bid; oral chlorpheniramine maleate, 12 mg bid; or placebo. The primary efficacy parameters were the changes in major and total symptom severity scores. RESULTS: Overall, across all 4 weeks of treatment, the mean percent improvements in the total and major symptom complex severity scores in both azelastine treatment groups were greater than those for the placebo group. For the azelastine 2 sprays bid group, the overall results were significant at P = .05 for the major symptom complex score and at .05 < P = .10 for the total symptom complex score versus placebo. For both azelastine treatment groups, improvements in all of the individual rhinitis symptoms were superior to those for the placebo group and, in general were clinically and statistically significant. Azelastine nasal spray was well tolerated; adverse experiences were generally application site reactions, mild to moderate, and not limiting to continued treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Azelastine nasal spray demonstrated broad clinical antirhinitis activity that for the 2 sprays/nostril bid dosage regimen was consistently clinically and statistically significant.

Efficacy of acrivastine with pseudoephedrine in treatment of allergic rhinitis due to ragweed.

BACKGROUND: Semprex-D capsules contain acrivastine 8 mg (a second generation H1-antagonist) plus pseudoephedrine HCl 60 mg and were developed to satisfy the needs of allergy suffers who prefer combination products designed to provide broader symptom relief. Approval of combination products by the US Food and Drug Administration requires demonstration that each component contributes to the overall effectiveness. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to demonstrate that both acrivastine and pseudoephedrine share in the efficacy of the combination in relieving allergy symptoms in patients sensitive to ragweed pollen. METHODS: This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel groups, balanced design, multicenter (13 sites) study. Patients 12 years of age or older with skin test reactivity to ragweed were recruited. Patients who qualified for the study were dispensed either (1) acrivastine + pseudoephedrine, (2) acrivastine, (3) pseudoephedrine, or (4) placebo with instructions to take one capsule 4 times daily and to record allergy symptom scores in a symptom diary 3 times daily for 14 days. Assessments of health, global allergy symptoms, protocol compliance, adverse events, and vital signs were also documented. RESULTS: A total of 702 patients were enrolled in this study. Over the 2-week period, the combination of acrivastine + pseudophedrine was significantly more effective than acrivastine, pseudoephedrine, and placebo for relief of all symptoms (P range .01 to .001); pseudoephedrine for treating symptoms responsive to antihistamines (P = .003); and acrivastine for treating symptoms responsive to nasal decongestants (P < .001). Relatively small increases in adverse experience rates were observed for the combination relative to the placebo. CONCLUSIONS: These findings in a large clinical trial demonstrate that each component of the combination of acrivastine 8 mg plus pseudoephedrine HCl 60 mg contributes to the overall efficacy, thereby supporting the conclusion that the combination is rational, safe, and effective for the treatment of allergic rhinitis.

Corticosteroid-sparing effect of azelastine in the management of bronchial asthma.

The objective of this double-blind trial was to evaluate the corticosteroid-sparing effect of azelastine in patients with chronic bronchial asthma. A total of 193 subjects received either 6 mg of azelastine twice per day or placebo (in a 2:1 ratio) in combination with beclomethasone dipropionate (6 to 16 inhalations per day). The number of daily inhalations of the corticosteroid was reduced until maximum reduction or elimination was achieved. Patients then entered a 12-wk maintenance period, during which patients were maintained on their lowest possible dose of inhaled corticosteroid. Compared with placebo, the azelastine group had a statistically significantly greater overall median reduction in inhaled corticosteroids (4.9 puffs/day for azelastine versus 3.1 puffs/day for placebo; p < or = 0.010) during the maintenance period. The azelastine group also had a statistically significantly higher percentage of patients with reductions of > or = 50% and > or = 75% from the baseline level (53 and 31%, respectively, for azelastine versus 34 and 14%, respectively, for placebo; p < or = 0.028). The results demonstrated that azelastine, 6 mg twice per day, can reduce the need for inhaled corticosteroids in patients with chronic bronchial asthma and not lead to a deterioration in pulmonary function.

Tilarin in combination with astemizole.

This multicentre double-blind, placebo controlled study had a practical objective, based on the expectation that many patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis will be prescribed oral antihistamine monotherapy by their primary care physician, whereas allergy specialists are more likely to prescribe combination therapy including antiinflammatories. The specific question was, "Will the addition of nedocromil sodium 1% nasal spray to astemizole tablets improve control of symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis induced by ragweed pollen, as compared to astemizole therapy alone?'. Following a one-week baseline, planned to coincide with the start of the local ragweed pollen season, patients (aged 12-64) were randomly assigned to four weeks' double-blind test treatment with either nedocromil sodium 1% nasal spray four times daily (QID) + astemizole (n = 146) or placebo nasal spray + astemizole (n = 148) or double-dummy (nasal spray + capsules) placebo (n = 71). Patient diary cards were kept throughout the five weeks, and clinic visits were made before and after baseline and after one and four weeks' treatment. During the 10-day peak pollen period, the diary card rhinitis symptom summary score (0-4 severity scale) was significantly reduced in patients receiving either astemizole alone (p < 0.001) or the combination therapy (p < 0.001) as compared with placebo. Direct comparison of the active treatments further showed that symptoms were significantly less severe (p < 0.01) with the combined therapy than with astemizole alone, and this despite significantly greater reliance on permitted rescue medications (p < 0.05 for pseudoephedrine usage) in the astemizole group. Clinical assessments of rhinitis made during the peak pollen visit, after the first week of test treatment, were also significantly (p < 0.05 - p < 0.01) in favour of combined therapy with nedocromil sodium 1% nasal spray + astemizole rather than astemizole alone, and at the same time this preference was confirmed by physician (p = 0.011) and patient (p = 0.003) opinions of symptom control. In conclusion, this antiinflammatory + antihistamine treatment proved superior to antihistamine alone for effective management of allergic rhinitis. The combined therapy worked quickly and was well-tolerated, with no serious adverse events or untoward effects on blood or urine variables.

Efficacy of once daily extended-release theophylline in decreasing the use of inhaled beta 2-agonists in stable, mild-to-moderate asthma patients.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the addition of extended-release theophylline to the daily treatment regimen of inhaled beta 2-agonist users would result in decreased use of beta 2-agonist while maintaining similar efficacy for treatment of asthma. METHODS: This was a single-blind, multicenter (six sites) study. Sixty-one patients with a history of mild-to-moderate asthma treated with inhaled beta 2-agonist were randomized to treatment with Theo-24 (anhydrous extended-release capsules) plus inhaled beta 2-agonist or placebo plus beta 2-agonist. Patients kept daily symptom diaries, measured peak flow rates, recorded puffs of inhaled beta 2-agonist, and adverse events during a 4-week treatment period. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were included in the efficacy analysis. The primary efficacy variable in this study was the mean number of puffs (adjusted for baseline differences) of beta 2-agonist inhaled per day. In this study, the addition of theophylline to the daily regimen of inhaled beta 2-agonist for 4 weeks significantly reduced the total daily dose of inhaled beta 2-agonist at weeks 3 and 4 of treatment compared with placebo. The differences were significant at the P < .05 level. For patients in the theophylline group, the number of puffs decreased from an unadjusted mean of 9.81 at baseline to an adjusted mean of 6.78 after 4 weeks of treatment compared with 9.91 at baseline and 8.17 for the placebo group. There were no unexpected or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the addition of once daily, extended-release theophylline to the daily regimen of inhaled beta 2-agonist for 4 weeks significantly reduced the total daily dose of inhaled beta 2-agonist at weeks 3 and 4 of treatment compared with placebo, while maintaining acceptable asthma symptom scores.

A dose-response study of the efficacy and safety of ipratropium bromide nasal spray in the treatment of the common cold.

Rhinorrhea is an annoying symptom of the common cold for which effective therapy is not currently available. Ipratropium bromide (IB) is an anticholinergic drug that has been shown to decrease glandular secretion when applied topically to the nasal mucosa. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of three doses of IB nasal spray versus either vehicle or no treatment in relieving rhinorrhea in patients with naturally acquired colds. Rhinorrhea severity was measured objectively by determining nasal discharge weights and subjectively by means of visual analog scale scores. Compared with either vehicle or no treatment, IB nasal spray produced a significant decrease in the severity of rhinorrhea. A dose of 84 micrograms (two sprays of a 0.06% solution in buffered saline solution) in each nostril was more efficacious than a 42 microgram per nostril dose and only marginally less efficacious than a 168 micrograms per nostril dose. The 84 micrograms per nostril dose also was associated with fewer adverse events than was the higher dose. None of the adverse events related to intranasal IB therapy was of a serious nature. The use of IB nasal spray appears to be a rational and safe approach to relieving rhinorrhea associated with the common cold.

Use of ipratropium bromide nasal spray in chronic treatment of nonallergic perennial rhinitis, alone and in combination with other perennial rhinitis medications.

To study the long-term safety and effectiveness of ipratropium bromide nasal spray 0.03% in the treatment of nonallergic perennial rhinitis, we administered this medication for 1 year in an open-label trial involving 285 patients. Our intention was to maintain the highest protocol dose possible to gain a clearer picture of the long-term side effect profile of the compound. Ipratropium bromide was well tolerated with no serious side effects in this patient population. It provided a significant improvement in rhinorrhea throughout the year-long trial; only 17 of 285 patients (6%) were considered treatment failures. There was an improvement in patient quality of life, as well as a substantial reduction in the need for other medications (antihistamines, decongestants, and nasal steroids) used to treat perennial rhinitis symptoms.

Prolonged effect of inhaled salmeterol against exercise-induced bronchospasm.

Physical exercise is a common trigger for bronchial asthma. We evaluated the preventive effect on exercise-induced bronchospasm (EIB) of a single 42 micrograms dose of salmeterol, a uniquely long-acting inhaled bronchodilator, and compared salmeterol with 180 micrograms albuterol in two independent, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies involving 161 subjects. Three exercise challenges were conducted over 12 h, and bronchoconstriction following the serial challenges was assessed as change in FEV1 compared with predose values. The mean maximal percentage decrease in FEV1 after the three exercise challenges was 5% at 0.5 h, 8% at 5.5 h, and 13% at 11.5 h postdose in the salmeterol group compared with 7, 25, and 27%, respectively, in the albuterol group and 27, 27, and 26%, respectively, in the placebo group (p < 0.001, overall treatment difference). Albuterol provided complete protection against EIB (defined as < 10% decrease in FEV1 compared with predose values) only after the first exercise challenge, but salmeterol continued to provide complete protection in the majority of subjects after each exercise challenge: 80% (44 of 55) at 0.5 h, 70% (37 of 53) at 5.5 h, and 55% (29 of 53) at 11.5 h. Electrocardiographic monitoring revealed no clinically significant changes in any treatment group 15 and 30 min following each exercise challenge. In summary, these data demonstrate that salmeterol is effective against EIB and that a single 42 micrograms dose can prevent EIB for up to 12 h.