Barbara A. Prillaman

Inhaled salmeterol and fluticasone: a study comparing monotherapy and combination therapy in asthma.

BACKGROUND The current stepwise approach to pharmacotherapy in the treatment of asthma includes the initiation of an inhaled corticosteroid with the addition of a long-acting inhaled bronchodilator if low dose inhaled corticosteroid fails to control asthma symptoms. OBJECTIVE To determine whether initiation of salmeterol and fluticasone propionate treatment together improves asthma control greater than initiation of monotherapy with the individual agents alone with no additional safety risk in patients with asthma who had not previously been treated with inhaled corticosteroids. METHODS A total of 136 male and female patients at least 12 years of age with asthma [forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV) between 50% and 80% of predicted] were randomized to twice daily salmeterol 42 microg, fluticasone propionate 88 microg, fluticasone propionate 220 microg, salmeterol 42 microg plus fluticasone propionate 88 microg, salmeterol 42 microg plus fluticasone propionate 220 microg, or placebo for 4 weeks. RESULTS Patients treated with salmeterol combined with fluticasone propionate had improvements over baseline in FEV at endpoint that were at least twice as great (0.6 to 0.7 L) as improvements in patients treated with salmeterol (0.3 L) or fluticasone propionate alone (0.3 L) (P < .05). Patient-rated data (peak expiratory flow, asthma symptom scores, percent of days with no asthma symptoms) confirmed greater (P < .05) mean change from baseline improvements after combined treatment compared with fluticasone propionate alone. No clinically significant differences were noted between treatment groups in any safety measurement. CONCLUSION Initiation of maintenance therapy with salmeterol and fluticasone propionate in patients with asthma treated with short-acting beta2-agonists alone provides greater improvements in pulmonary function and symptom control than initiation of maintenance therapy with fluticasone propionate alone.

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.

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 .).

Comparison of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray and oral montelukast for the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis symptoms.

BACKGROUND Few studies have directly compared the efficacy of intranasal corticosteroids with that of leukotriene receptor antagonists for the treatment of daytime and nighttime symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR). OBJECTIVE To compare fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray, 200 microg daily, with oral montelukast, 10 mg daily, for the relief of SAR symptoms. METHODS Patients with SAR 15 years or older were randomized to receive either fluticasone propionate (n = 367) or montelukast (n = 369) in this double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change from baseline in daytime total nasal symptom scores (TNSSs) (the sum of 4 daytime individual nasal symptom scores [INSSs] assessing nasal congestion, itching, rhinorrhea, and sneezing), averaged across weeks 1 and 2. Secondary efficacy measures included the 4 daytime INSSs, nighttime TNSSs (the sum of 3 nighttime INSSs assessing congestion on awakening, difficulty going to sleep, and nighttime awakenings), and the 3 nighttime INSSs averaged across weeks 1 and 2. RESULTS Mean changes from baseline in daytime TNSSs (P < .001), all daytime INSSs (P < .001), nighttime TNSSs (P < .001), and all nighttime INSSs (P < or = .02) showed significant differences favoring fluticasone propionate over montelukast across 2 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSION Compared with montelukast, fluticasone propionate provided significantly greater improvement in daytime and nighttime SAR symptoms.

Deterioration in Asthma Control When Subjects Receiving Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol 100/50 mcg Diskus are “Stepped-Down”

In this study, 647 subjects stable on fluticasone propionate/salmeterol Diskus 100/50 mcg BID (FSC) were randomized to continue FSC 100/50 mcg BID or “step down” to either fluticasone propionate (FP) 100mcg BID, salmeterol (SAL) 50 mcg BID, or montelukast (MON) 10 mg once daily for 16 weeks. Overall asthma control significantly improved in the FSC group; whereas, “stepping down” to FP, SAL, or MON resulted in deterioration in asthma control, as determined by decreased measures of lung function and clinical features. This study provides support that treatment of both inflammation and smooth muscle dysfunction may be necessary to achieve and maintain asthma control in patients uncontrolled on ICS.

Fluticasone furoate nasal spray is more effective than fexofenadine for nighttime symptoms of seasonal allergy.

Nasal symptoms of allergic rhinitis are an important cause of sleep disturbance. Reduction of nasal symptoms, particularly nasal obstruction, has been linked to improvements in self-reported sleep quality. The enhanced-affinity intranasal corticosteroid fluticasone furoate and the oral antihistamine fexofenadine were compared with respect to nighttime symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis. In two randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group studies, patients received fluticasone furoate nasal spray (FFNS),110 microg (study 1, n = 312; study 2, n = 224); fexofenadine, 180 mg (study 1, n = 311; study 2, n = 227); or placebo (study 1, n = 313; study 2, n = 229) once daily for 2 weeks. Fluticasone furoate was more effective (p < 0.001) than fexofenadine and placebo in both studies with respect to the mean changes from baseline over the treatment period in the nighttime symptoms score, nighttime reflective total nasal symptom score, predose instantaneous nasal symptom score, and morning peak nasal inspiratory flow. Fluticasone furoate was more effective than placebo (p <or= 0.001) in study 1 and more effective than both placebo and fexofenadine (p <or= 0.034) in study 2 with respect to the mean changes from baseline in the nighttime reflective total ocular symptom score and predose instantaneous total ocular symptom score. In these double-dummy studies, fexofenadine did not separate from placebo in comparisons of the nighttime symptoms score or the nighttime nasal or ocular symptom measures. The incidence of adverse events was similar among groups. FFNS once daily was more effective than fexofenadine and placebo with respect to nighttime sleep disturbance caused by seasonal allergy symptoms.

Improved Ability to Perform Strenuous Activities After Treatment with Fluticasone Propionate/Salmeterol Combination in Patients with Persistent Asthma

Patients with asthma experience disruptions in usual activities that can impair their quality of life, and in patients whose daily routine involves an active lifestyle, these disruptions can be severe. We assessed the patient-perceived effect of treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol combination (FSC), compared with fluticasone propionate (FP) or salmeterol (SAL) alone, on activity limitations, particularly strenuous physical activities. The Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) was administered in two 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials comparing FSC 100/50 or 250/50 µg twice daily vs. the individual components alone in 686 adults and adolescents with asthma. In one study, patients were stratified by prior treatment [low to medium doses of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or SAL], and in the other study, all patients were previously treated with medium to high doses of ICS. Patients prospectively identified five activities they performed regularly and were asked how these activities were limited by their asthma. The effect of randomized treatment on strenuous activities (e.g., aerobics, cycling, hiking, and basketball) was assessed. In both studies, treatment with FSC resulted in clinically meaningful improvements (i.e., change in AQLQ of ≥0.5) and was statistically significantly better than SAL in both studies and FP in one study. Treatment of the two main components of asthma—inflammation and bronchoconstriction—with FSC results in clinically meaningful improvements in the ability of patients with persistent asthma to perform not only their usual activities but also strenuous activities.

Does measuring BHR add to guideline derived clinical measures in determining treatment for patients with persistent asthma

RATIONALE Little is known about the use of biomarkers in guiding treatment decisions in routine asthma management. The objective of this study was to determine whether adding a LABA to an ICS would control bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) at an overall lower dose of ICS when titration of medication was based upon the assessment of routine clinical measures with or without the measurement of BHR. METHODS After a 2-week run-in period, subjects (> or = 12 years) were randomized to one of three treatment groups. Two groups followed a BHR treatment strategy (based on clinical parameters [lung function, asthma symptoms, and bronchodilator use] and BHR) and were treated with either fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FSC(BHR) group) or fluticasone propionate (FP(BHR) group) (n=156 each). The third group followed a clinical treatment algorithm (based on clinical parameters alone) and were treated with fluticasone propionate (FP(REF) group; n=154). All treatments were administered via Diskus. Treatment doses were adjusted as needed every 8 weeks for 40 weeks according to the subjects derived severity class, which was based on clinical measures of asthma control with or without BHR. RESULTS The mean total daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) dose during the double-blind treatment period was lower, although not statistically significant, in the FSC(BHR) group compared with the FP(BHR) group (a difference of -42.9 mcg; p=0.07). Compared with the FP(REF) group, the mean total daily ICS dose was higher in the FSC(BHR) group (a difference of 85.2 mcg) and was significantly higher in the FP(BHR) group (a difference of 131.2 mcg, p=0.037). CONCLUSION This study demonstrated that for most subjects, control of BHR was maintained when treatment was directed toward control of clinical parameters. In addition, there was a trend towards control of BHR and clinical measures at a lower dose of ICS when used concurrently with salmeterol.

PROPERTIES OF MULTIPLE INTERSECTION-UNION TESTS FOR MULTIPLE ENDPOINTS IN COMBINATION THERAPY TRIALS

We consider intersection-union tests involving multiple endpoints in a combination drug trial, for which we control the familywise error rate in the strong sense using closed testing methods. Bonferroni-Holm, Simes-Hommel, and Resampling-Based methods all are considered in this context. Familywise error rate control heuristics are developed and evaluated using a simulation study that is specifically tailored to the intersection-union setting. Both Resampling-Based and Simes-Hommel uniformly outperform the Bonferroni-Holm. Using simulations of power, the choice of Simes-Hommel versus Resampling-Based is seen to depend on the particular alternative of interest. Because it is simpler and has generally good power, we recommend the Simes-Hommel intersection-union tests. The techniques are illustrated using real data from a clinical trial to evaluate a combination asthma therapy. * This research was performed while the first author was Research Fellow at GlaxoWellcome Inc.

Prevalence of Airway Obstruction Assessed by Lung Function Questionnaire

OBJECTIVE To estimate the prevalence of unidentified chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and determine the screening accuracy of the Lung Function Questionnaire (LFQ). PATIENTS AND METHODS Cigarette smokers who had a smoking history of 10 or more pack-years and were aged 30 years or older were recruited from 36 centers from February 18, 2009, to May 29, 2009. A total of 1575 patients completed a Web-based survey including the 5-item LFQ. Spirometry was performed on patients with an LFQ total score of 18 or less and on a subset scoring more than 18. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients at risk of airflow obstruction as measured by the LFQ (score, ≤ 18) in whom an airflow obstruction was confirmed by spirometry. RESULTS Of the patients who completed the LFQ, 849 (54%) had standardized spirometry data available. On the basis of LFQ and spirometry results, the estimated prevalence of possible COPD was 17.9% (95% confidence interval, 15.3%-20.6%). At a cut point of 18 or less, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the LFQ were 88%, 25%, 21%, and 90%, respectively. Approximately 1 in 5 patients (21%) aged 30 years or older and 1 in 4 (26%) aged 50 years or older scored 18 or less on the LFQ and had a ratio of forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration to forced vital capacity less than 0.70. CONCLUSION On the basis of postbronchodilator spirometry results using weighted estimates, approximately 1 in 5 patients (21%) aged 30 years or older with a smoking history of 10 or more pack-years seen in a primary care setting is likely to have COPD. The LFQ could be a helpful COPD case-finding tool for clinicians to identify patients who need further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01013948.