The effect of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy on the risk of severe asthma exacerbations following episodes of high reliever use: an exploratory analysis of two randomised,controlled studies with comparisons to standard therapy

Background

Divergent strategies have emerged for the management of severe asthma. One strategy utilises high and fixed doses of maintenance treatment, usually inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β₂-agonist (ICS/LABA), supplemented by a short-acting β₂-agonist (SABA) as needed. Alternatively, budesonide/formoterol is used as both maintenance and reliever therapy. The latter is superior to fixed-dose treatment in reducing severe exacerbations while achieving similar or better asthma control in other regards. Exacerbations may be reduced by the use of budesonide/formoterol as reliever medication during periods of unstable asthma. We examined the risk of a severe exacerbation in the period after a single day with high reliever use.

Methods

Episodes of high reliever use were quantified and exacerbations occurring post-index day with these episodes were examined post hoc in two double-blind studies comparing the efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy (Symbicort SMART™, Turbuhaler®) 160/4.5 μg twice daily plus as needed with similar or higher maintenance doses of ICS/LABA plus SABA or formoterol.

Results

Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy significantly reduced the risk of episodes of high reliever use (>6 inhalations/day) vs. all alternative ICS/LABA regimens. With conventional fixed-dose treatment the need for exacerbation treatment within 21 days ranged from 6.0–10.1% of days post-index for all regimens compared with 2.5–3.4% of days with budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy.

Conclusions

Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy reduces the incidence of high reliever episodes and the exacerbation burden immediately following these episodes vs. alternative ICS/LABA plus SABA regimens at up to double the maintenance dose of ICS.

Trial registration

These studies do not have registration numbers as they were conducted before clinical trial registration was required     

Once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol 100/25 mcg versus twice daily combination therapies in COPD – mixed treatment comparisons of clinical efficacy

Background

Fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) 100/25 mcg is a once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta₂ agonist (LABA) treatment approved in the United States, Canada and Europe for the long-term maintenance therapy of COPD. We report data from mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) of once-daily FF/VI against established twice-daily ICS/LABA combination therapies on clinical efficacy outcomes.

Methods

Data from 33 parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ICS/LABAs, of ≥8 weeks’ duration in patients ≥12 years of age with COPD, identified by systematic review, were analysed using covariate-adjusted Bayesian hierarchical models for three efficacy outcomes. Lung function, assessed by change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁), was the outcome of primary interest (n = 28 studies). Secondary objectives were assessment of annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations (n = 15) and patient-reported health status, measured by change from baseline in St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total score (n = 20). Overall, 25 different treatments were included in the MTC; we report findings, including probabilities of non-inferiority, for comparisons of once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg with twice-daily fluticasone propionate (FP)/salmeterol (SAL) 500/50 mcg and budesonide (BUD)/formoterol (FORM) 400/12 mcg.

Results

For FEV₁, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated >99% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg using a 50 mL margin. For annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated 73% and 77% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg, respectively, using a 10% rate ratio margin. For SGRQ Total score, the corresponding probabilities of non-inferiority were 99% and 98%, respectively, on a 2-unit margin. Significant covariate effects were identified: increased age was associated with deterioration in FEV₁ and reduced exacerbation frequency; shorter study duration was associated with reduced exacerbation frequency.

Conclusions

FF/VI 100/25 mcg was comparable with corresponding doses of FP/SAL and BUD/FORM on lung function and health status outcomes. Non-inferiority on moderate/severe exacerbation rate was not demonstrated to the same degree of confidence, though observed rates were similar. Model limitations include a weak treatment network for the exacerbation analysis and variability across the included studies. Our data support previous RCT findings suggesting that the efficacy of FF/VI 100/25 mcg on lung function and health status in COPD is comparable with twice-daily ICS/LABAs.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-015-0184-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Effect of β2-adrenergic receptor gene (ADRB2) 3′ untranslated region polymorphisms on inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β2-adrenergic agonist response

Background

Evidence suggests that variation in the length of the poly-C repeat in the 3′ untranslated region (3′UTR) of the β₂-adrenergic receptor gene (ADRB2) may contribute to interindividual variation in β-agonist response. However, methodology in previous studies limited the assessment of the effect of sequence variation in the context of poly-C repeat length. The objectives of this study were to design a novel genotyping method to fully characterize sequence variation in the ADRB2 3′UTR poly-C repeat in asthma patients treated with inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β₂-adrenergic agonist (ICS/LABA) combination therapy, and to analyze the effect of the poly-C repeat polymorphism on clinical response.

Methods

In 2,250 asthma patients randomized to treatment with budesonide/formoterol or fluticasone/salmeterol in a six-month study (AstraZeneca study code: SD-039-0735), sequence diversity in the ADRB2 poly-C repeat region was determined using a novel sequencing-based genotyping method. The relationship between the poly-C repeat polymorphism and the incidence of severe asthma exacerbations, and changes in pulmonary function and asthma symptoms from baseline to the average during the treatment period, were analyzed.

Results

Poly-C repeat genotypes were assigned in 97% (2,192/2,250) of patients. Of the 13 different poly-C repeat alleles identified, six alleles occurred at a frequency of >5% in one or more population in this study. The repeat length of these six common alleles ranged from 10 to 14 nucleotides. Twelve poly-C repeat genotypes were observed at a frequency of >1%. No evidence of an association between poly-C repeat genotype and the incidence of severe asthma exacerbations was observed. Patients’ pulmonary function measurements improved and asthma symptoms declined when treated with ICS/LABA combination therapy regardless of poly-C repeat genotype.

Conclusions

The extensive sequence diversity present in the poly-C repeat region of the ADRB2 3′UTR did not predict therapeutic response to ICS/LABA therapy.     

Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids can be safe in COPD patients at low risk of exacerbation: a real-life study on the appropriateness of treatment in moderate COPD patients (OPTIMO)

Background

It has been suggested that withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in COPD patients on maintenance treatment results in deterioration of symptoms, lung function and exacerbations. The aim of this real-life, prospective, multicentric study was to investigate whether withdrawal of ICS in COPD patients at low risk of exacerbation is linked to a deterioration in lung function and symptoms and to a higher frequency of exacerbations.

Methods

914 COPD patients, on maintenance therapy with bronchodilators and ICS, FEV₁>50% predicted, and <2 exacerbations/year were recruited. Upon decision of the primary physicians, 59% of patients continued their ICS treatment whereas in 41% of patients ICS were withdrawn and regular therapy was continued with long-acting bronchodilators mostly (91% of patients). FEV₁, CAT (COPD Assessment Test), and occurrence of exacerbations were measured at the beginning (T0) and at the end (T6) of the 6 months observational period.

Results

816 patients (89.3%) concluded the study. FEV₁, CAT and exacerbations history were similar in the two groups (ICS and no ICS) at T0 and at T6. We did not observe any deterioration of lung function symptoms, and exacerbation rate between the two groups at T0 and T6.

Conclusions

We conclude that the withdrawal of ICS, in COPD patients at low risk of exacerbation, can be safe provided that patients are left on maintenance treatment with long-acting bronchodilators.     

Corticosteroid plus β<Subscript>2</Subscript>-agonist in a single inhaler as reliever therapy in intermittent and mild asthma: a proof-of-concept systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Current guidelines recommend a single inhaler maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) regimen for moderate to severe asthma. However, evidence for the inhaled corticosteroid plus fast-onset-acting β₂-agonist (ICS/FABA) as reliever therapy in management of intermittent and mild asthma patients is lacking.

Objective

To systematically explore efficacy and safety of the proof-of-concept of the ICS plus FABA regimen in a single inhaler as reliever therapy across children and adults with intermittent and mild persistent asthma.

Methods

We searched online bibliographic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving the as-needed use of ICS/FABA as monotherapy in intermittent or mild asthma patients. The primary outcomes were exacerbations and the hazard ratio (HR) of the time to first exacerbation.

Results

Six RCTs (n?=?1300) met the inclusion criteria. Compared with the as-needed FABA regimen, the as-needed use of ICS/FABA as monotherapy statistically reduced exacerbations (RR?=?0.56, P?=?0.001). Compared with regular ICS regimen, the as-needed ICS/FABA therapy had slightly higher risk of exacerbations (RR?=?1.39, P?=?0.011). The HR for time to first exacerbations in the ICS/FABA regimen was significant lower when compared with FABA regimen (HR?=?0.52, P?=?0.002) but had no difference when compared with ICS regimen (HR?=?1.30, P?=?0.286). The corticosteroid exposure in the daily ICS regimen was 2- to 5-fold compared with as-needed use of ICS/FABA regimen.

Conclusions

Our analysis shows that the ICS/FABA as a symptom-driven therapy may be a promising alternative regimen for the patients with intermittent or mild asthma, but it needs further real-world RCTs to confirm these findings.

     

Risk of Pneumonia with Inhaled Corticosteroid versus Long-Acting Bronchodilator Regimens in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A New-User Cohort Study

Introduction

Observational studies using case-control designs have showed an increased risk of pneumonia associated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)-containing medications in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). New-user observational cohort designs may minimize biases associated with previous case-control designs.

Objective

To estimate the association between ICS and pneumonia among new users of ICS relative to inhaled long-acting bronchodilator (LABD) monotherapy.

Methods

Pneumonia events in COPD patients ≥45 years old were compared among new users of ICS medications (n = 11,555; ICS, ICS/long-acting β₂-agonist [LABA] combination) and inhaled LABD monotherapies (n = 6,492; LABA, long-acting muscarinic antagonists) using Cox proportional hazards models, with propensity scores to adjust for confounding. Setting: United Kingdom electronic medical records with linked hospitalization and mortality data (2002–2010). New users were censored at earliest of: pneumonia event, death, changing/discontinuing treatment, or end of follow-up. Outcomes: severe pneumonia (primary) and any pneumonia (secondary).

Results

Following adjustment, new use of ICS-containing medications was associated with an increased risk of pneumonia hospitalization (n = 322 events; HR = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.14, 2.10) and any pneumonia (n = 702 events; HR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.22, 1.83). Crude incidence rates of any pneumonia were 48.7 and 30.9 per 1000 person years among the ICS-containing and LABD cohorts, respectively. Excess risk of pneumonia with ICS was reduced when requiring ≥1 month or ≥ 6 months of new use. There was an apparent dose-related effect, with greater risk at higher daily doses of ICS. There was evidence of channeling bias, with more severe patients prescribed ICS, for which the analysis may not have completely adjusted.

Conclusions

The results of this new-user cohort study are consistent with published findings; ICS were associated with a 20–50% increased risk of pneumonia in COPD, which reduced with exposure time. This risk must be weighed against the benefits when prescribing ICS to patients with COPD.     

Add-on therapy options in asthma not adequately controlled by inhaled corticosteroids: a comprehensive review

Many patients with persistent asthma can be controlled with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). However, a considerable proportion of patients remain symptomatic, despite the use of ICS. We present systematically evidence that supports the different treatment options. A literature search was made of Medline/PubMed to identify randomised and blinded trials. To demonstrate the benefit that can be obtained by increasing the dose of ICS, dose-response studies with at least three different ICS doses were identified. To demonstrate whether more benefit can be obtained by adding long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA), leukotriene antagonist (LTRA) or theophylline than by increasing the dose of ICS, studies comparing these options were identified. Thirdly, studies comparing the different "add-on" options were identified. The addition of a LABA is more effective than increasing the dose of ICS in improving asthma control. By increasing the dose of ICS, clinical improvement is likely to be of small magnitude. Addition of a LTRA or theophylline to the treatment regimen appears to be equivalent to doubling the dose of ICS. Addition of a LABA seems to be superior to an LTRA in improving lung function. However, addition of LABA and LTRA may be equal with respect to asthma exacerbations. However, more and longer studies are needed to better clarify the role of LTRAs and theophylline as add-on therapies.     

Detrimental effects of albuterol on airway responsiveness requires airway inflammation and is independent of β-receptor affinity in murine models of asthma

Background

Inhaled short acting β2-agonists (SABA), e.g. albuterol, are used for quick reversal of bronchoconstriction in asthmatics. While SABA are not recommended for maintenance therapy, it is not uncommon to find patients who frequently use SABA over a long period of time and there is a suspicion that long term exposure to SABA could be detrimental to lung function. To test this hypothesis we studied the effect of long-term inhaled albuterol stereoisomers on immediate allergic response (IAR) and airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) in mouse models of asthma.

Methods

Balb/C mice were sensitized and challenged with ovalbumin (OVA) and then we studied the IAR to inhaled allergen and the AHR to inhaled methacholine. The mice were pretreated with nebulizations of either racemic (RS)-albuterol or the single isomers (S)- and (R)-albuterol twice daily over 7 days prior to harvest.

Results

We found that all forms of albuterol produced a significant increase of IAR measured as respiratory elastance. Similarly, we found that AHR was elevated by albuterol. At the same time a mouse strain that is intrinsically hyperresponsive (A/J mouse) was not affected by the albuterol isomers nor was AHR induced by epithelial disruption with Poly-L-lysine affected by albuterol.

Conclusions

We conclude that long term inhalation treatment with either isomer of albuterol is capable of precipitating IAR and AHR in allergically inflamed airways but not in intrinsically hyperresponsive mice or immunologically naïve mice. Because (S)-albuterol, which lacks affinity for the β2-receptor, did not differ from (R)-albuterol, we speculate that isomer-independent properties of the albuterol molecule, other than β2-agonism, are responsible for the effect on AHR.     

Safety and tolerability of once-daily umeclidinium/vilanterol 125/25 mcg and umeclidinium 125 mcg in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from a 52-week,randomized, double-blind,placebo-controlled study

Background

The long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) umeclidinium (UMEC) and the combination of UMEC with the long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) vilanterol (UMEC/VI) are approved maintenance treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the US and EU. They are not indicated for the treatment of asthma.

Methods

In this 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group safety study (GSK study DB2113359; {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01316887","term_id":"NCT01316887"}}NCT01316887), patients were randomized 2:2:1 to UMEC/VI 125/25 mcg, UMEC 125 mcg, or placebo. Study endpoints included adverse events (AEs), clinical chemistry and hematology parameters, vital signs, 12-lead, and 24-hour Holter electrocardiograms. COPD exacerbations and rescue medication use were assessed as safety parameters; lung function was also evaluated.

Results

The incidence of on-treatment AEs, serious AEs (SAEs), and drug-related AEs was similar between treatment groups (AEs: 52–58%; SAEs: 6–7%; drug-related AEs: 12–13%). Headache was the most common AE in each treatment group (8–11%). AEs associated with the LAMA and LABA pharmacologic classes occurred at a low incidence across treatment groups. No clinically meaningful effects on vital signs or laboratory assessments were reported for active treatments versus placebo. The incidences of atrial arrhythmias with UMEC/VI 125/25 mcg were similar to placebo; for UMEC 125 mcg, the incidences of ectopic supraventricular beats, sustained supraventricular tachycardia, and ectopic supraventricular rhythm were ≥2% greater than placebo. With active treatments, COPD exacerbations were fewer (13–15% of patients reporting ≥1 exacerbation) and on average less rescue medication was required (1.6–2.2 puffs/day) versus placebo (24% reporting ≥1 exacerbation, 2.6 puffs/day). Both active treatments improved lung function versus placebo.

Conclusion

UMEC/VI 125/25 mcg and UMEC 125 mcg were well tolerated over 12 months in patients with COPD.     

Tiotropium Respimat? in asthma: a double-blind,randomised, dose-ranging study in adult patients with moderate asthma

Background

Tiotropium, a once-daily long-acting anticholinergic bronchodilator, when administered via Respimat® SoftMist™ inhaler (tiotropium Respimat®) significantly reduces the risk of severe exacerbations and improves lung function in patients with severe persistent asthma that is not fully controlled despite using inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β₂-agonists. To further explore the dose–response curve in asthma, we investigated the efficacy and safety of three different doses of tiotropium Respimat® as add-on to ICS in symptomatic patients with moderate persistent asthma.

Methods

In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, four-way crossover study, patients were randomised to tiotropium Respimat® 5 μg, 2.5 μg or 1.25 μg or placebo Respimat®, once daily in the evening. Each treatment was administered for 4 weeks, without washout between treatment periods. Eligibility criteria included ≥60% and ≤90% of predicted normal forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) and seven-question Asthma Control Questionnaire mean score of ≥1.5. Patients were required to continue maintenance treatment with stable medium-dose ICS for at least 4 weeks prior to and during the treatment period. Long-acting β₂-agonists were not permitted during the treatment phase. The primary efficacy end point was peak FEV₁ measured within 3 hours after dosing (peak FEV_1(0-3h)) at the end of each 4-week period, analysed as a response (change from study baseline).

Results

In total, 149 patients were randomised and 141 completed the study. Statistically significant improvements in peak FEV_1(0-3h) response were observed with each tiotropium Respimat® dose versus placebo (all P < 0.0001). The largest difference from placebo was with tiotropium Respimat® 5 μg (188 mL). Trough FEV₁ and FEV₁ area under the curve (AUC)_(0-3h) responses were greater with each tiotropium Respimat® dose than with placebo (all P < 0.0001), and both were greatest with 5 μg. Peak forced vital capacity (FVC)_(0-3h), trough FVC and FVC AUC_(0-3h) responses, versus placebo, were greatest with tiotropium Respimat® 5 μg (P < 0.0001, P = 0.0012 and P < 0.0001, respectively). Incidence of adverse events was comparable between placebo and all tiotropium Respimat® groups.

Conclusions

Once-daily tiotropium Respimat® add-on to medium-dose ICS improves lung function in symptomatic patients with moderate asthma. Overall, improvements were largest with tiotropium Respimat® 5 μg.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01233284","term_id":"NCT01233284"}}NCT01233284.     

Step-down from high dose fixed combination therapy in asthma patients: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Asthma guidelines suggest that therapy can be reduced once asthma is controlled. Despite these recommendations, asthmatic patients are seldom stepped down in clinical practice, and questions remain about when and how to reduce asthma therapy. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate lung function and asthma control in patients who were stepped down from the highest recommended dose of inhaled corticosteroid/long acting β₂ agonist combination therapy.

Methods

This was a prospective, randomised, controlled, two-arm parallel group study. Asthmatic patients who were fully controlled with a high daily dose (1000/100 μg) of fluticasone/salmeterol were randomly assigned to 6 months of open-label treatment with either 500/100 μg fluticasone/salmeterol Diskus daily or 400/24 μg extrafine beclomethasone/formoterol pMDI daily. The primary outcome was the change in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) values between baseline and the end of treatment. The secondary outcomes included asthma control and exacerbation frequency.

Results

Four hundred twenty-two patients were included in the analysis. The PEF values remained above 95% of the predicted values throughout the study. The end-study morning PEF rates showed equivalence between the groups (difference between means, 2.49 L/min; 95% CI, -13.43 to 18.42). No changes from baseline were detected in PEF and forced expiratory volume in 1 second measured at the clinics, in the symptom scores or in the use of rescue medication. Asthma control was maintained in 95.2% of the patients at 6 months. No significant differences between the groups were detected in any other parameter, including exacerbation frequency and adverse events.

Conclusions

Stepping down patients whose asthma is controlled with the highest recommended dose of fluticasone/salmeterol to either 500/100 μg fluticasone/salmeterol daily or 400/24 μg extra-fine beclomethasone/formoterol daily provides comparable maintenance of lung function and asthma control.

Trial registration

clinicaltrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00497237","term_id":"NCT00497237"}}NCT00497237     

Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50?μg versus salmeterol 50?μg after chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation

Background

Inhaled long-acting beta₂ agonists used alone and in combination with an inhaled corticosteroid reduce the risk of exacerbations in patients with stable COPD. However, the relative efficacy of these agents in preventing recurrent exacerbations in those recovering from an initial episode is not known. This study compared the rate of COPD exacerbations over the 26 weeks after an initial exacerbation in patients receiving the combination of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol (FP/SAL) or SAL alone.

Methods

Patients (n = 639) aged ≥40 years were randomized to either twice-daily inhaled FP/SAL 250/50 μg or SAL 50 μg. Primary, and secondary, endpoints were rates of recurrent severe, and moderate/severe, exacerbations of COPD. Lung function, health outcomes and levels of biomarkers of systemic inflammation were also assessed.

Results

There was no statistically significant treatment difference in rates of recurrent severe exacerbations (treatment ratio 0.92 [95% CI: 0.58, 1.45]) and moderate/severe exacerbations (0.82 [0.64, 1.06]) between FP/SAL and SAL in the intent-to-treat population. Pre-dose morning FEV₁ change from baseline was greater (0.10 L [0.04, 0.16]) with FP/SAL than SAL. No treatment difference was seen for other endpoints including patient-reported health outcomes and biomarker levels for the full cohort.

Conclusions

No significant treatment difference between FP/SAL and SAL was seen in COPD exacerbation recurrence for the complete cohort. Treatment benefit with FP/SAL over SAL (treatment ratio 0.68 [0.47, 0.97]) was seen in patients having FEV₁ ≥ 30% and prior exposure to ICS. No unexpected safety issues were identified with either treatment. Patients with the most severe COPD may be more refractory to treatment.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT01110200). This study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline (study number ADC113874).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-014-0105-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Protective effect of budesonide/formoterol compared with formoterol,salbutamol and placebo on repeated provocations with inhaled AMP in patients with asthma: a randomised,double-blind,cross-over study

Background

The budesonide/formoterol combination is successfully used for fast relief of asthma symptoms in addition to its use as maintenance therapy. The temporarily increased corticosteroid dose during increasing inhaler use for symptom relief is likely to suppress any temporary increase in airway inflammation and may mitigate or prevent asthma exacerbations. The relative contribution of the budesonide and formoterol components to the improved asthma control is unclear.

Methods

The acute protective effect of inhaled budesonide was tested in a model of temporarily increased airway inflammation with repeated indirect airway challenges, mimicking an acute asthma exacerbation. A randomised, double-blind, cross-over study design was used. Asthmatic patients (n = 17, mean FEV₁ 95% of predicted) who previously demonstrated a ≥30% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) after inhaling adenosine 5''-monophosphate (AMP), were challenged on four consecutive test days, with the same dose of AMP (at 09:00, 12:00 and 16:00 hours). Within 1 minute of the maximal AMP-induced bronchoconstriction at 09:00 hours, the patients inhaled one dose of either budesonide/formoterol (160/4.5 μg), formoterol (4.5 μg), salbutamol (2 × 100 μg) or placebo. The protective effects of the randomised treatments were assessed by serial lung function measurements over the test day.

Results

In the AMP provocations at 3 and 7 hours after inhalation, the budesonide/formoterol combination provided a greater protective effect against AMP-induced bronchoconstriction compared with formoterol alone, salbutamol and placebo. In addition all three active treatments significantly increased FEV₁ within 3 minutes of administration, at a time when inhaled AMP had induced the 30% fall in FEV₁.

Conclusions

A single dose of budesonide/formoterol provided a greater protective effect against inhaled AMP-induced bronchoconstriction than formoterol alone, both at 3 and at 7 hours after inhalation. The acute protection against subsequent bronchoconstrictor stimuli such as inhaled AMP and the rapid reversal of airway obstruction supports the use of budesonide/formoterol for both relief and prevention in the treatment of asthma.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov number {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT00272753","term_id":"NCT00272753"}}NCT00272753     

Long-Term Once-Daily Tiotropium Respimat? Is Well Tolerated and Maintains Efficacy over 52 Weeks in Patients with Symptomatic Asthma in Japan: A Randomised,Placebo-Controlled Study

Background

This study assessed the long-term safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat, a long-acting inhaled anticholinergic bronchodilator, in asthma, added on to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) with or without long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA).

Methods

285 patients with symptomatic asthma, despite treatment with ICS±LABA, were randomised 2:2:1 to once-daily tiotropium 5 μg, tiotropium 2.5 μg or placebo for 52 weeks (via the Respimat SoftMist inhaler) added on to ICS±LABA, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study (NCT01340209). Primary objective: to describe the long-term safety profile of tiotropium. Secondary end points included: trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁) response; peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) response; seven-question Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7) score.

Results

At Week 52, adverse-event (AE) rates with tiotropium 5 μg, 2.5 μg and placebo were 88.6%, 86.8% and 89.5%, respectively. Commonly reported AEs with tiotropium 5 μg, 2.5 μg and placebo were nasopharyngitis (48.2%, 44.7%, 42.1%), asthma (28.9%, 29.8%, 38.6%), decreased PEFR (15.8%, 7.9%, 21.1%), bronchitis (9.6%, 13.2%, 7.0%), pharyngitis (7.9%, 13.2%, 3.5%) and gastroenteritis (10.5%, 3.5%, 5.3%). In the tiotropium 5 μg, 2.5 μg and placebo groups, 8.8%, 5.3% and 5.3% of patients reported drug-related AEs; 3.5%, 3.5% and 15.8% reported serious AEs. Asthma worsening was the only serious AE reported in more than one patient. At Week 52, adjusted mean trough FEV₁ and trough PEFR responses were significantly higher with tiotropium 5 μg (but not 2.5 μg) versus placebo. ACQ-7 responder rates were higher with tiotropium 5 μg and 2.5 μg versus placebo at Week 24.

Conclusions

The long-term tiotropium Respimat safety profile was comparable with that of placebo Respimat, and associated with mild to moderate, non-serious AEs in patients with symptomatic asthma despite ICS±LABA therapy. Compared with placebo, tiotropium 5 μg, but not 2.5 μg, significantly improved lung function and symptoms, supporting the long-term efficacy of the 5 μg dose.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01340209     

Is low dose inhaled corticosteroid therapy as effective for inflammation and remodeling in asthma? A randomized,parallel group study

Background

While most of the clinical benefits of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy may occur at low doses, results of dose-ranging studies are inconsistent. Although symptom/lung function response to low and high dose ICS medication is comparable, it is uncertain whether low dose ICSs are as effective as high dose in the treatment of inflammation and remodeling.

Methods

22 mild or moderate asthmatic adult subjects (corticosteroid free for > 2 months) participated in a randomized, parallel group study to compare effects of fluticasone propionate (FP) 200 mcg/day and 1000 mcg/day. Alveolar macrophage (AM)-derived cytokines and basement membrane thickness (BMT) were measured at baseline and after 7 weeks treatment while symptoms, spirometry, exhaled nitric oxide (eNO) and airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) to mannitol at baseline and 6 weeks.

Results

FP improved spirometry, eNO, symptoms and AHR with no difference between low and high dose FP. Both high and low dose FP reduced GM-CSF, TNF-alpha and IL-1ra, with no change in BMT and with no differences between low and high dose FP.

Conclusions

200 μg/day of FP was as effective as 1000 μg/day in improving asthma control, airway inflammation, lung function and AHR in adults in the short term. Future studies should examine potential differential effects between low and high dose combination therapy (ICS/long acting beta agonist) on inflammation and airway remodeling over longer treatment periods.