Efficacy and safety of once-daily treatment with beclomethasone dipropionate nasal aerosol in subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

An aerosol formulation may be preferred by some allergic rhinitis (AR) patients, to avoid the "wet feeling" and nasal runoff associated with aqueous nasal corticosteroid sprays. Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) hydrofluoroalkane nasal aerosol is a recently developed, nonaqueous, nonchlorofluorocarbon formulation of BDP for the treatment of AR. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and quality-of-life benefits of BDP nasal aerosol in subjects with seasonal AR (SAR). Eligible subjects (≥12 years of age) enrolled in this 2-week study were randomized to either BDP nasal aerosol at 320 µg/day (n = 169) or placebo (n = 171). Efficacy assessments included reflective and instantaneous total nasal symptom scores (rTNSS and iTNSS, respectively), Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) score, reflective and instantaneous total ocular symptom scores (rTOSS and iTOSS, respectively), and physician-assessed total nasal symptom score (PNSS). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Subjects receiving BDP nasal aerosol showed a significantly greater improvement from baseline in average A.M. and P.M. rTNSS versus placebo (treatment difference, -0.91; 95% confidence interval, -1.3, -0.5; p < 0.001) over 2 weeks of treatment. Greater improvements in rTNSS with BDP nasal aerosol compared with placebo were evident by day 2 and were maintained throughout the treatment period. Similarly, significant improvements were seen with BDP nasal aerosol in iTNSS (p < 0.001) and RQLQ score (p = 0.005) compared with placebo. Treatment with BDP nasal aerosol also resulted in greater improvements in rTOSS (p = 0.002), iTOSS (p = 0.003), and PNSS (p < 0.001) relative to placebo. BDP nasal aerosol was well tolerated and the overall safety profile was similar to placebo. Results from this clinical study indicated that BDP nasal aerosol provided significant AR symptom relief and was well tolerated in patients with SAR with an overall safety profile similar to placebo. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01024608.

Efficacy and safety of two doses of budesonide/formoterol fumarate metered dose inhaler in COPD.

Inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting ß2-agonist combination therapy is a recommended treatment option for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and increased exacerbation risk, particularly those with elevated blood eosinophil levels. SOPHOS (NCT02727660) evaluated the efficacy and safety of two doses of budesonide/formoterol fumarate dihydrate metered dose inhaler (BFF MDI) versus formoterol fumarate dihydrate (FF) MDI, each delivered using co-suspension delivery technology, in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD and a history of exacerbations. In this phase 3, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, 12-52-week, variable length study, patients received twice-daily BFF MDI 320/10 µg or 160/10 µg, or FF MDI 10 µg. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in morning pre-dose trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at week 12. Secondary and other endpoints included assessments of moderate/severe COPD exacerbations and safety. The primary analysis (modified intent-to-treat) population included 1843 patients (BFF MDI 320/10 µg, n=619; BFF MDI 160/10 µg, n=617; and FF MDI, n=607). BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg improved morning pre-dose trough FEV1 at week 12 versus FF MDI (least squares mean differences 34 mL [p=0.0081] and 32 mL [p=0.0134], respectively), increased time to first exacerbation (hazard ratios 0.827 [p=0.0441] and 0.803 [p=0.0198], respectively) and reduced exacerbation rate (rate ratios 0.67 [p=0.0001] and 0.71 [p=0.0010], respectively). Lung function and exacerbation benefits were driven by patients with blood eosinophil counts ≥150 cells·mm-3. The incidence of adverse events was similar, and pneumonia rates were low (≤2.4%) across treatments. SOPHOS demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of BFF MDI 320/10 µg and 160/10 µg in patients with moderate-to-very severe COPD at increased risk of exacerbations.

Efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 mcg Diskus administered once daily.

BACKGROUND: The twice daily administration of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-agonist (LABA) has been shown to be effective in achieving asthma control. The once daily administration of an ICS/LABA may be a treatment option for some patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of fluticasone propionate (FP)/salmeterol via a single inhaler (FSC) administered once daily compared with FP once daily, FSC twice daily, or placebo. METHODS: A 12-week, randomized, double-blind multicenter study conducted in 844 patients > or = 12 years of age who were symptomatic while using a short-acting beta(2)-agonist alone. Blinded treatments included: FSC 250/50 mcg once daily in the evening (FSC 250/50 QD), FP 250 mcg once daily in the evening (FP 250 QD), FSC 100/50 mcg twice daily (FSC 100/50 mcg BID), or placebo. All treatments were delivered via the Diskus device. RESULTS: All treatments demonstrated greater improvements in efficacy measures compared with placebo. Overall, the greatest improvements were observed in the patients receiving FSC, either once or twice daily, compared with the FP 250 QD group. The two FSC treatments were similar except that QD dosing did not maintain improvements in lung function for 24h compared with twice daily dosing. All treatments were well tolerated. No suppression of HPA axis, as assessed by 24-h urinary cortisol excretion, was observed in any of the active treatment groups. CONCLUSION: In patients symptomatic on a short-acting beta(2)-agonist alone, FSC 100/50 mcg BID was shown to provide better efficacy than a higher strength (FSC 250/50 mcg) administered once daily. However, a once daily regimen was effective and may be a valuable treatment option for some patients. Registered at (http://ctr.gsk.co.uk/welcome.asp) (SAS30022).

Physiological predictors Of peak inspiRatory flow using Observed lung function resultS (POROS): evaluation at discharge among patients hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation.

BACKGROUND: Peak inspiratory flow (PIF) as generated through the resistance of a dry powder inhaler (DPI) device is a critical patient-dependent maneuver impacting the success of DPI medication delivery. Despite its importance, it is not routinely measured in clinical practice. Little is currently known about the relationship, if any, between PIF through DPI devices, routine spirometry and disease outcomes. AIM: The aim of this study was to identify potential predictors of PIF for different DPIs from spirometric parameters and patient characteristics and explore the association between PIF and follow-up events. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective observational study at discharge among patients hospitalized for a COPD exacerbation at Attikon hospital, Athens, Greece. Spirometry was performed using an Easy on-PC™ spirometer. PIF was measured through four DPI resistances using the In-Check™ DIAL. Regression analyses were used to investigate the association between PIF through resistances and spirometric parameters obtained at discharge, comorbidities and demographic parameters. RESULTS: Forty-seven COPD patients (mean [±SD], age 71 [±9] years, 72% males, 51% current smokers) were included in this study. Overall, 85% and 15% were classified as GOLD (2017) groups D and C, respectively. Most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension (70%) and cardiovascular disease (53%). In the final regression model, higher PIF was significantly associated with the following: higher FEV1 and % predicted peak expiratory flow (PEF) for Turbohaler® (R-squared value 0.374); higher FEV1 and diagnosis of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) for Aerolizer® (R-squared value 0.209) and higher FEV1, younger age and diagnosis of ischemic heart disease (IHD) for Diskus® (R-squared value 0.350). However, R-squared values for all three devices were weak (<0.4). CONCLUSION: The study did not provide evidence to support the use of surrogate measurements for PIF through device resistance, which could assist in determining the appropriateness of inhaler device type. Although PIF measurement is feasible in patients at discharge and could be a valuable addition to the standard of care in COPD management, it needs to be measured directly.

Tolerability of a salmeterol xinafoate/fluticasone propionate hydrofluoroalkane metered-dose inhaler in adolescent and adult patients with persistent asthma: a 52-week, open-label, stratified, parallel-group, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with asthma require an inhaled long-acting beta(2)-agonist (LABA) in addition to an inhaled corticosteroid to adequately control their disease. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term tolerability of a salmeterol xinafoate/ fluticasone propionate (SFC) hydrofluoroalkane metered-dose inhaler (MDI) at 3 different doses BID. METHODS: This 52-week, open-label, stratified, parallel-group study assessed SFC in patients with persistent asthma. Patients, aged > or = 12 years, with a diagnosis of asthma for > or = 6 months, and a percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) or peak expiratory flow (PEF) between 40% and 90% were enrolled between January 1999 and June 1999. The last patient completed the 12-month study in June 2000. Patients were allowed to continue their current asthma treatment during run-in, with the exception that short-acting beta(2)-agonists (SABAs), LABAs, and oral bronchodilators were not to be used 6, 12, and 24 hours, respectively, prior to the randomization visit. During the open-label randomized treatment period, patients were instructed to discontinue all other asthma medications with the exception of the albuterol MDI to use on an as-needed basis. Patients were assigned to treatment based on their existing asthma regimen: SABA monotherapy or LABA with or without fluticasone propionate (FP) <250 microg/d or equivalent (group 1); FP 250 to 500 microg/d or equivalent with or without LABA (group 2); and FP >500 to 1000 microg/d or equivalent with or without LABA (group 3). Patients administered 2 inhalations BID of SFC hydrofluoroalkane at doses of 25/50 microg/actuation (group 1), 25/125 microg/actuation (group 2), or 25/250 pg/actuation (group 3). The primary end point was tolerability as assessed by adverse events (AEs). AEs were determined via diary cards and investigator inquiry at visits. Serious AEs were defined as death, any life-threatening event, hospitalization, disability, congenital anomaly in the patient's offspring, or other important medical events judged by the investigator to be serious. Other outcomes included clinical laboratory tests (hematology, chemistry, electrolytes), 24-hour urinary-free cortisol excretion, 12-lead electrocardiograms, oropharyngeal examinations, vital signs, clinic visit lung function tests (FEV(1) and PEF), daily diary card entries of morning PEF, and rescue medication usage. RESULTS: Of the 372 patients assessed for eligibility, 325 from 22 centers across Canada were enrolled and randomized to treatment. Group 1 consisted of 98 patients (55% women; 86% white; mean age, 37 years; mean [SD] weight, 79 [20] kg). Group 2 consisted of 109 patients (46% women; 94% white; mean age, 44 years; mean [SD] weight, 80 [17] kg). Group 3 consisted of 118 patients (47% women; 90% white; mean age, 45 years; mean [SD] weight, 80 [18] kg). A total of 15 adolescents (aged 12-17 years) comprised 11%, 2%, and 2% of groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Treatments were well tolerated, and 274 (84%) of the 325 patients enrolled completed the study. Upper respiratory tract infection was the most common AE reported: 52%, 37%, and 49% of patients in groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Twenty (6%) patients withdrew because of an AE, with worsening asthma being the most frequent reason (n = 9). None of the serious AEs (11 [3 %]) were considered drug related by the investigators. Improvements in FEV(1) and PEF and re- duction in symptomatic albuterol use occurred during the first 4 weeks and were maintained in all groups throughout the 52-week study. CONCLUSIONS: BID doses of SFC hydrofluoroalkane 50/100 pg, 50/250 pg, and 50/500 pg administered via MDI for 52 weeks were well tolerated in this population of adolescents and adults with persistent asthma.

The Salmeterol Multicenter Asthma Research Trial: a comparison of usual pharmacotherapy for asthma or usual pharmacotherapy plus salmeterol.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety of salmeterol xinafoate or placebo added to usual asthma care. DESIGN: A 28-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, observational study. SETTING: Study subjects were seen once in the study physician's office for screening and were provided all blinded study medication for the entire study period. Follow-up by telephone was scheduled every 4 weeks. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects (> 12 years old) with asthma as judged by the study physician were eligible. Individuals with a history of long-acting beta2-agonist use were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: Salmeterol, 42 mug bid via metered-dose inhaler (MDI), and placebo bid via MDI. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Following an interim analysis in 26,355 subjects, the study was terminated due to findings in African Americans and difficulties in enrollment. The occurrence of the primary outcome, respiratory-related deaths, or life-threatening experiences was low and not significantly different for salmeterol vs placebo (50 vs 36; relative risk [RR] = 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91 to 2.14). There was a small, significant increase in respiratory-related deaths (24 vs 11; RR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.06 to 4.41) and asthma-related deaths (13 vs 3; RR, 4.37; 95% CI, 1.25 to 15.34), and in combined asthma-related deaths or life-threatening experiences (37 vs 22; RR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.01 to 2.89) in subjects receiving salmeterol vs placebo. The imbalance occurred largely in the African-American subpopulation: respiratory-related deaths or life-threatening experiences (20 vs 5; RR, 4.10; 95% CI, 1.54 to 10.90) and combined asthma-related deaths or life-threatening experiences (19 vs 4; RR, 4.92; 95% CI, 1.68 to 14.45) in subjects receiving salmeterol vs placebo. CONCLUSIONS: For the primary end point in the total population, there were no significant differences between treatments. There were small, but statistically significant increases in respiratory-related and asthma-related deaths and combined asthma-related deaths or life-threatening experiences in the total population receiving salmeterol. Subgroup analyses suggest the risk may be greater in African Americans compared with Caucasian subjects. Whether this risk is due to factors including but not limited to a physiologic treatment effect, genetic factors, or patient behaviors leading to poor outcomes remains unknown.

Fluticasone propionate nasal spray is superior to montelukast for allergic rhinitis while neither affects overall asthma control.

BACKGROUND: Asthma and allergic rhinitis are both highly prevalent diseases and often coexist in patients. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of rhinitis therapy on asthma outcomes in adult and adolescent patients with both seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and persistent asthma. METHODS: A total of 863 patients (mean baseline FEV1 81% predicted) were randomized to receive open-label fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FSC), 100/50 microg bid for 4 weeks, plus either blinded fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (FPANS) 200 microg/d, montelukast 10 mg/d, or placebo. Patients kept daily records of peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma, and rhinitis symptoms and rescue albuterol use. RESULTS: FPANS added to FSC resulted in superior outcomes for daytime total nasal symptom scores (D-TNSS) and individual daytime nasal specific symptoms (congestion, rhinorrhea, sneezing, and itching) compared with montelukast plus FSC and placebo plus FSC (p < or = 0.001). Montelukast plus FSC was superior to placebo plus FSC only for D-TNSS and itching and sneezing. Morning PEF, asthma symptoms, and rescue albuterol use improved significantly (p < or = 0.001) in all treatment groups, but improvements were comparable across the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with persistent asthma treated with FSC, the addition of montelukast or FPANS for the treatment of SAR resulted in no additional improvements in overall asthma control compared with FSC alone. However, FPANS provided superior rhinitis control compared with montelukast. These data suggest that asthma and rhinitis should each be optimally treated.

Increased Dose of Inhaled Corticosteroid versus Add-On Long-acting ß-Agonist for Step-Up Therapy in Asthma.

RATIONALE: Guidelines advocate adding long-acting ß-agonist (LABA) to inhaled corticosteroid as the preferred step-up therapy to increasing inhaled corticosteroid dose for patients with uncontrolled asthma on inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy. However, less than 5% of patients with asthma qualify for the randomized controlled trials on which guidelines are based. Thus, real-world data are needed to complement the results of randomized trials with narrow entry criteria. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of stepping up asthma therapy with an increased dose of various types of inhaled corticosteroid as compared with add-on LABA. METHODS: We performed a historical matched cohort study using large primary care databases to compare asthma step-up therapy with small- and standard size-particle inhaled corticosteroid versus added LABA for patients 12-80 years old. As outcomes, we examined a composite of asthma control and rates of severe exacerbations. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The odds of asthma control and rates of severe exacerbations over one outcome year were comparable with increased inhaled corticosteroid dose versus added LABA. The adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for achieving asthma control with increased inhaled corticosteroid dose versus inhaled corticosteroid/LABA were 0.99 (0.88-1.12) for small-particle inhaled corticosteroid (n = 3,036 per cohort) and 0.85 (0.67-1.07) for standard size-particle inhaled corticosteroid (n = 809 per cohort). The adjusted rate ratios (95% confidence interval) for severe exacerbations, compared with inhaled corticosteroid/LABA combination inhaler, were 1.04 (0.91-1.20) and 1.18 (0.92-1.54), respectively. The results were not affected by smoking status. CONCLUSIONS: When applied to a broad primary care population, antiinflammatory therapy using increased doses of small- or standard size-particle inhaled corticosteroid is as effective as adding LABA, as measured by outcomes important to both patients and providers. Real-world populations and outcomes need to be taken into consideration when formulating treatment recommendations.

Combination therapy with inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids: a paradigm shift in asthma management.

Long-acting inhaled beta2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids are classes of drugs with different mechanisms of action that are commonly used to provide effective long-term control of persistent asthma. Scientific and clinical data support the complementary mechanisms of action of the inhaled corticosteroids and the long-acting beta2-agonists in achieving a superior level of asthma control. In addition, evidence supports significant reductions in exacerbations and effective control of airway inflammation with an inhaled corticosteroid and a long-acting beta2-agonist versus higher dosages of inhaled corticosteroids or combinations of other therapeutic agents with an inhaled corticosteroid. Finally, there are distinct economic advantages to combining an inhaled corticosteroid and a long-acting beta2-agonist in the treatment of asthma relative to other treatment regimens.

Pharmacokinetic profile of beclomethasone dipropionate hydrofluoroalkane after intranasal administration versus oral inhalation in healthy subjects: results of a single-dose, randomized, open-label, 3-period crossover study.

BACKGROUND: Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) is an anti-inflammatory corticosteroid that is rapidly metabolized to the pharmacologically active monoester, beclomethasone-17-monopropionate (17-BMP). Recently, a hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-propelled nasal aerosol formulation of BDP was developed to treat allergic rhinitis. However, the pharmacokinetic profile of BDP HFA nasal aerosol has not been previously investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated and compared the systemic levels of 17-BMP and BDP after a single dose of intranasally administered or orally inhaled BDP HFA in healthy subjects. METHODS: In this single-center, randomized, open-label, 3-period crossover study, healthy subjects received single doses of intranasal BDP HFA (80 and 320 µg) and orally inhaled BDP HFA (320 µg). The primary pharmacokinetic parameters assessed were area under the concentration-time curve until the last measurable value (AUC(last)) and C(max) for 17-BMP. For AUC(last) and C(max), point estimates for treatment differences and CIs were calculated on the log scale and then exponentiated to provide estimates of the geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and associated CIs. RESULTS: Thirty subjects were randomized to receive study medication (aged 18-45 years, 66.7% male). Mean plasma concentrations of 17-BMP after intranasal administration of BDP HFA (for both 80- and 320-µg doses) were substantially lower than that of orally inhaled BDP HFA (320 µg) across all time points. Mean AUC(last) values of 17-BMP for intranasal 80 µg, intranasal 320 µg, and orally inhaled 320 µg were 295.8, 1139.7, and 4140.3 pg·hr/mL, respectively. Mean C(max) values were 92.1, 262.7, and 1343.7 pg/mL, respectively. The GMR of AUC(last) for 17-BMP with intranasal BDP HFA 320 µg versus orally inhaled BDP HFA 320 µg was 0.275, indicating substantially lower systemic bioavailability with intranasal administration than with oral inhalation. Similarly, the GMR of AUC(last) for 17-BMP with intranasal BDP HFA 80 µg versus 320 µg was 0.260, suggesting approximate dose proportionality (4-fold difference). Pharmacokinetic results for BDP were similar to those seen for 17-BMP. All doses of intranasal and orally inhaled BDP HFA were well tolerated, and no treatment-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that 80 and 320 µg BDP HFA nasal aerosols have substantially lower systemic bioavailability than 320 µg orally inhaled BDP HFA in healthy subjects. All treatments were well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01537692.

Montelukast added to fluticasone propionate does not alter inflammation or outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Airway inflammation is a key pathological feature of asthma which underlies its clinical presentation. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether adding a leukotriene modifier to an inhaled corticosteroid produces further clinical and/or anti-inflammatory benefits in patients symptomatic on short-acting beta(2)-agonists. METHODS: Patients uncontrolled on short-acting beta(2)-agonists were treated for 12 weeks with either fluticasone propionate (100mcg BD) or fluticasone propionate (100mcg BD) and montelukast (10mg QD) in a randomized, double-blind, parallel group study. Bronchoscopy with endobronchial biopsy and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) was performed before and after treatment to compare effects on airway inflammation. RESULTS: Of 103 subjects enrolled, 89 subjects completed treatment and 82 subjects had matched pair biopsy samples. Submucosal eosinophil counts, the primary endpoint, and asthma control improved to similar extents after both treatments (p

Salmeterol response is not affected by beta2-adrenergic receptor genotype in subjects with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that there might be an association between albuterol use and worsening asthma in patients homozygous for arginine (Arg/Arg) at codon 16 of the beta-receptor. However, it is not known whether similar responses occur in Arg/Arg patients receiving long-acting beta2-agonists. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the effects of variation in the beta2-adrenergic receptor gene (ADRB2) on clinical response to salmeterol administered with fluticasone propionate. METHODS: Subjects (n = 183) currently receiving short-acting beta2-agonists were randomized to twice-daily therapy with salmeterol, 50 microg, administered with fluticasone propionate, 100 microg, in a single inhaler or daily therapy with montelukast for 12 weeks, followed by a 2- to 4-day run-out period. RESULTS: There was sustained and significant improvement (P < .001) over baseline in all measures of asthma control in subjects receiving salmeterol, regardless of Arg16Gly genotype. Morning peak expiratory flow in subjects with the Arg/Arg genotype showed 89.0 +/- 16.1 L/min improvement over baseline compared with 93.7 +/- 12.7 L/min for Gly/Gly subjects and 92.5 +/- 11.9 L/min for Arg/Gly subjects. Pairwise changes were similar for Arg/Arg compared with Gly/Gly or Arg/Gly genotypes (estimated differences, 4.7 L/min and 3.5 L/min, respectively). Responses did not appear to be modified by haplotype pairs. During the run-out period, all subjects had predictable and similar decreases in measures of asthma control, with no differences between genotypes. CONCLUSION: Response to salmeterol does not vary between ADRB2 genotypes after chronic dosing with an inhaled corticosteroid. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Analyses from this study indicate that genetic polymorphisms leading to Arg16Gly sequence changes within the beta2-adrenergic receptor do not affect patients' responses to recommended asthma therapy with salmeterol and fluticasone propionate.

Variability in asthma severity in pediatric subjects with asthma previously receiving short-acting beta2-agonists.

OBJECTIVE: An analysis of 5 double-blinded, randomized, 12-week asthma trials was undertaken to evaluate pediatric subjects (4 to 11 years; n=276) who were previously receiving short-acting beta2-agonists alone and subsequently received treatment with placebo. At baseline, all subjects met National Asthma Education and Prevention Program criteria for moderate/severe asthma. STUDY DESIGN: Asthma severity was categorized individually for symptoms, albuterol use, and morning peak expiratory flow and then overall taking into account all three parameters. RESULTS: Subjects spent the majority of weeks (55%) in the moderate/severe category. Subjects spent approximately 48%, 31%, and 22% of weeks in intermittent, mild, and moderate/severe categories and 57%, 27%, and 15% of weeks, respectively, based on asthma symptoms and albuterol use. Subjects spent approximately 62%, 31%, and 8% of weeks in intermittent/mild, moderate, and severe categories, based on peak expiratory flow; however, >35% of subjects exhibited >or=15 changes in asthma severity classification, based on peak expiratory flow. CONCLUSIONS: Asthma is a disease with varying symptomatology, and pediatric subjects frequently move between severity categories, especially in children with inadequate asthma control. These data also emphasize that asthma severity cannot be determined in many pediatric subjects by discrete, point-in-time assessments of lung function, albuterol use, or asthma symptoms. Failure to recognize this problem may contribute to underestimation of disease severity in pediatric subjects.

Control of airway inflammation maintained at a lower steroid dose with 100/50 microg of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) have been shown to reverse epithelial damage and decrease lamina reticularis thickness in patients with asthma. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated whether clinical asthma control and airway inflammation could be maintained after switching therapy from medium-dose fluticasone propionate (FP) to low-dose FP administered with the long-acting beta2-agonist (LABA) salmeterol. METHODS: Eighty-eight subjects (age, > or =18 years) who, during open-label screening, demonstrated improved asthma control after an increase from 100 microg of FP twice daily to 250 microg of FP twice daily were randomized to receive 100/50 microg of FP/salmeterol through a Diskus inhaler (GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC) twice daily or continue 250 microg of FP twice daily through a Diskus inhaler for 24 weeks. Clinical outcomes were monitored, and bronchial biopsy specimens and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid were obtained before and after 24 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between treatments with respect to eosinophils in the bronchial mucosa and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid; mucosal mast cells, neutrophils, or CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, or CD25+ T lymphocytes; or concentration of mediators (GM-CSF, IL-8, and eosinophil cationic protein). The 2 treatments were not different with respect to lamina reticularis thickness. Consistent with the airway inflammatory measures, clinical and physiologic measures of asthma control were also similar. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that control of asthma and airway inflammation is maintained over the 24-week treatment period when patients requiring a medium-dose ICS are switched to a lower-dose ICS with a LABA. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: A lower-dose ICS with a LABA is effective in controlling inflammation and providing clinical asthma control, confirming current guideline recommendations.

Effect of fluticasone/salmeterol administered via a single device on exercise-induced bronchospasm in patients with persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Exercise is a common trigger of asthma symptoms in patients with persistent asthma. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the protective effect of fluticasone/salmeterol against exercise-induced bronchospasm. METHODS: Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial of 192 asthma patients who used moderate-dose inhaled corticosteroids. Patients (aged 12-50 years; mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1], 78% of predicted at baseline) were randomized to receive fluticasone/salmeterol (250/50 microg twice daily) or fluticasone alone (250 microg twice daily) via Diskus for 4 weeks. Exercise challenge tests were performed 1 and 8.5 hours after administration of the first (day 1) and last (week 4) doses of blinded study medication. RESULTS: On day 1 and at week 4, mean +/- SEM values for the maximal percentage decline in FEV1 1 hour after drug administration were 11.4% +/- 1.5% and 10.9% +/- 1.5% for fluticasone/salmeterol compared with 20.0% +/- 1.7% and 18.4% +/- 1.8% for fluticasone (P < .001). At 8.5 hours, mean +/- SEM values on day 1 and at week 4 were 11.6% +/- 1.4% and 8.9% +/1.1%, respectively, for fluticasone/salmeterol and 12.6% +/- 1.6% and 12.9% +/- 1.4%, respectively, for fluticasone (P = .01 at week 4). More fluticasone-treated patients did not complete the 8.5-hour exercise challenges (36% on day 1 and 33% at week 4) compared with the fluticasone/salmeterol group (18% each) (P < or = .01). Improvements in peak expiratory flow rate and albuterol rescue-free days were significantly greater with fluticasone/salmeterol vs fluticasone over weeks 1 to 4 (P < or = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the improvements in other measures of asthma control, long-term fluticasone/salmeterol therapy also provided protection against exercise-induced bronchospasm in patients with persistent asthma.

Asthma variability in patients previously treated with beta2-agonists alone.

BACKGROUND: According to national asthma guidelines, asthma severity can be classified as intermittent, mild, moderate, or severe on the basis of lung function, symptoms, nighttime awakenings, and exacerbations. Although it is widely believed that patients might not remain consistently in any given severity category over time, few studies have examined this directly. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the variability in disease severity-control among patients with persistent asthma who have not yet received an asthma maintenance treatment. METHODS: We performed an analysis of asthma severity-control over time in placebo-treated patients (n = 85) from 2 randomized, double-blind, 12-week clinical trials in patients with asthma previously receiving beta(2)-agonists alone. Asthma severity-control was assessed on the basis of morning percent predicted peak expiratory flow, albuterol use, and symptoms. RESULTS: At baseline, all patients met the criteria for moderate or severe persistent asthma (mean FEV(1) of 64% of predicted value or albuterol use and symptoms on 4.7 and 6.0 days per week, respectively). The mean percentage of treatment weeks that patients met all criteria for intermittent, mild, moderate, and severe asthma were 9%, 14%, 71%, and 6%, respectively. On the basis of morning peak expiratory flow, patients were classified as having intermittent-mild, moderate, or severe disease on 52%, 41%, and 7% of days, respectively. With regard to days per week with albuterol use or asthma symptoms, patients spent 59% and 45% of weeks, respectively, in the intermittent and mild categories. CONCLUSION: Asthma control cannot be adequately assessed in many patients by using discrete point-in-time assessments of lung function, short-acting beta-agonist use, or asthma symptoms. This might lead to underestimation of disease severity and contribute to inadequate therapy and, ultimately, asthma morbidity.

Steroid-sparing effects of fluticasone propionate 100 microg and salmeterol 50 microg administered twice daily in a single product in patients previously controlled with fluticasone propionate 250 microg administered twice daily.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent use of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and an inhaled long-acting beta2-agonist provides better overall asthma control than the use of higher doses of ICS alone. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether fluticasone propionate (FP) combined with salmeterol in the Diskus device can be used to reduce the dose of ICS in patients currently stable on medium-dose ICS while maintaining asthma control. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 12- to 24-week trial consisting of a 3-part run-in period. The run-in period was designed to first establish FP 250 microg administered twice a day (bid) via Diskus as the minimum effective dose. During run-in period 1, patients received FP 220 microg bid or the equivalent for 10 to 14 days. Controlled patients moved to run-in period 2 (5-28 days), which assessed asthma stability on FP 100 microg bid administered via Diskus. Only patients who became unstable on FP 100 microg bid were eligible to enter run-in period 3 (26-30 days), during which they were placed on FP 250 microg bid and those regaining asthma control were eligible for randomization. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who remained in the study with no evidence of worsening asthma. Secondary efficacy measures included FEV1, morning peak expiratory flow, percent of symptom-free days, and daily albuterol use. RESULTS: Only 5% of patients treated with FP100/salmeterol withdrew because of worsening asthma in the first 12 weeks; this compared with 7% in the FP250 group. All patients from a subset of sites continued in the study for an additional 12 weeks; only an additional 1% of patients treated with either FP100/salmeterol or FP250 withdrew because of worsening asthma. Secondary efficacy measures confirmed primary efficacy results. CONCLUSION: In patients requiring FP250 bid for asthma stability, FP100/salmeterol bid was steroid-sparing, allowing a 60% reduction in the FP dose while maintaining overall asthma control.

Patient perceptions of an inhaled asthma medication administered as an inhalation powder via the Diskus or as an inhalation aerosol via a metered-dose inhaler.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient preference, ease of use, and correctness of use of fluticasone propionate administered as inhalation powder via the Diskus (GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC) and as inhalation aerosol administered via metered-dose inhaler (MDI). METHODS: In 154 patients 12 years of age and older with asthma and a history of MDI use, the Diskus and the MDI were compared in a randomized, open-label, 7-week crossover study. RESULTS: In patients who had used both devices, more found the Diskus easier to use (59%) and preferred it overall (60%) compared with the MDI (P < or = 0.025). Ninety-eight percent (for the MDI) vs 91% (for the Diskus) of patients were able to correctly perform all the maneuvers necessary to use the devices correctly by either viewing a single demonstration and/or reading the instructions for use. Ninety-four percent of all patients found it easier to tell the number of residual doses with the Diskus (P < 0.001), and 59% of patients indicated that they would most likely request the Diskus from their physician (P = 0.025). Compliance was significantly better with the Diskus; 91.1% of patients used the Diskus as directed compared with 78.6% for the MDI (P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: In patients exposed to both devices, the majority preferred the Diskus and found it easier to use compared with the MDI. Ninety-one percent of patients used the Diskus correctly with minimal training, and when given a choice, most indicated they would likely request the Diskus from their physicians. Together, these data indicate a significant level of acceptance of the Diskus device in this patient population.