Safety of Adding Salmeterol to Fluticasone Propionate in Children with Asthma.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) have been shown to increase the risk of asthma-related death among adults and the risk of asthma-related hospitalization among children. It is unknown whether the concomitant use of inhaled glucocorticoids with LABAs mitigates those risks. This trial prospectively evaluated the safety of the LABA salmeterol, added to fluticasone propionate, in a fixed-dose combination in children. METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, children 4 to 11 years of age who required daily asthma medications and had a history of asthma exacerbations in the previous year to receive fluticasone propionate plus salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization), as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The statistical design specified that noninferiority would be shown if the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio for the primary safety end point was less than 2.675. The main efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation that led to treatment with systemic glucocorticoids, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: Among the 6208 patients, 27 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 21 in the fluticasone-alone group had a serious asthma-related event (all were hospitalizations); the hazard ratio with fluticasone-salmeterol versus fluticasone alone was 1.28 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 2.27), which showed the noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol (P=0.006). A total of 265 patients (8.5%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 309 (10.0%) in the fluticasone-alone group had a severe asthma exacerbation (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving children with asthma, salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone was associated with the risk of a serious asthma-related event that was similar to the risk with fluticasone alone. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline; VESTRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01462344 .).

Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone.

BACKGROUND: The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group. (AUSTRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01475721.).

Bupropion SR vs. placebo for weight loss in obese patients with depressive symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of bupropion sustained-release (bupropion SR) in reducing weight and depressive symptoms in obese adults. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Obese adults (body mass index, 30 to 44 kg/m(2)) not currently meeting criteria for major depression but with depressive symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory score 10-30) received bupropion SR 300 mg/d or placebo for 26 weeks with a 500 kcal/d-deficit diet. Patients who lost <5% of baseline weight at week 12 had bupropion SR dosage or placebo increased to 400 mg/d in a blinded fashion. RESULTS: The bupropion SR group (n = 193) lost an average of 4.4 kg (4.6% of baseline weight) vs. 1.7 kg (1.8% of baseline weight) on placebo (n = 191, p < 0.001, last-observation-carried-forward analysis). More patients in the bupropion SR group than in the placebo group (40% vs. 16% of intent-to-treat sample, 50% vs. 28% of completers, respectively) lost at least 5% of baseline weight (p < 0.05 at week 4, p < 0.001 at weeks 6 to 26). The percentage of patients reporting > or =50% decrease in depressive symptoms did not differ between groups, but depressive symptoms improved more with bupropion SR than with placebo among patients with a history of major depression (p < 0.05, weeks 4 to 26). In the sample as a whole, improvement in depressive symptoms was related to weight loss of > or =5% regardless of treatment (p < 0.0001). Bupropion SR was well-tolerated. DISCUSSION: Bupropion SR in combination with a 500 kcal/d-deficit diet facilitated weight loss. Weight loss of > or =5% may improve mood in obese patients with depressive symptoms.

Comparative Effects of Ceftazidime Two or Three Times Daily in Patients with Skin and Skin Structure Infections.

BACKGROUND: Skin and skin structure infections are among the most common infectious diagnoses in both the hospital and community settings. If untreated, these infections can produce serious complications. Successful antimicrobial therapy for these infections requires coverage against the causative pathogens, particularly Staphylococcus aureus. OBJECTIVE: This randomized, single-blind, multicenter study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of intravenous ceftazidime 2 g given two times daily (BID) with that of intravenous ceftazidime 1 g given three times daily (TID) for the treatment of skin and skin structure infections caused by ceftazidime-sensitive pathogens. METHODS: Adults (greater-than-or-equal18 years) were eligible for enrollment if they were hospitalized or in home health care settings and they had a skin or skin structure infection caused by a ceftazidime-sensitive pathogen. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ceftazidime 2 g every 12 h or ceftazidime 1 g every 8 h as an intermittent infusion over 15--30 min. Treatment was continued for 2--3 days beyond the time the patient became asymptomatic or evidence of bacterial eradication was obtained; however, total treatment duration had to be at least 5 days. Patients were assessed for their clinical and bacteriological response at the end of treatment and for their clinical response at follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 806 patients were enrolled in the study, 406 of whom received ceftazidime 2 g BID and 400 of whom received ceftazidime 1 g TID. Both treatments were administered for a mean duration of 9 days. At the end of therapy, 248 of 264 (94%) clinically evaluable patients receiving ceftazidime BID and 258 of 275% (94%) clinically evaluable patients receiving ceftazidime TID achieved clinical cure or improvement (p = 0.953). Pathogens were eradicated or presumed to be eradicated from 217 of 256 (85%) bacteriologically evaluable patients receiving ceftazidime BID and from 228 of 266 (86%) bacteriologically evaluable patients receiving ceftazidime TID (p = 0.760). Of 1131 isolates, the most common pathogens were S. aureus (30%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (10%). Both regimens were well tolerated with only 13 patients (3%) in the BID group and 16 patients (4%) in the TID group withdrawing because of an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that ceftazidime 2 g given twice daily is as effective as ceftazidime 1 g given three times daily for the treatment of skin and skin structure infections. In addition, the twice-daily regimen has the advantage of convenience.