Christopher Kalberg

The addition of salmeterol to fluticasone propionate versus increasing the dose of fluticasone propionate in patients with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND Current treatment guidelines define inhaled corticosteroids such as fluticasone propionate (FP) as the cornerstone of anti-inflammatory therapy for asthma. OBJECTIVE The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding salmeterol therapy to patients who remain symptomatic while receiving FP as compared with increasing the dose of FP. METHODS In a multicenter, double-blind study conducted over 24-weeks, 437 patients aged 12 years and older and receiving FP 88 microg twice daily for 2 to 4 weeks were randomly assigned to receive either salmeterol (42 microg twice daily) or FP 220 microg twice daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was morning peak expiratory flow. Secondary measures included FEV1, symptom scores, nighttime awakenings, and supplemental albuterol use. Safety was assessed by reported adverse events and asthma exacerbations. RESULTS The addition of salmeterol resulted in significantly greater improvements in lung function and symptom control as compared with increasing the dose of FP. Over weeks 1 to 24, morning peak expiratory flow was increased by 47 L/min from baseline with salmeterol treatment as compared with 24 L/min with FP 220 microg twice daily (P < .001) while the percent of symptom-free days increased from baseline by 26% of days as compared with 10% of days (P < .001). The adverse event profiles were similar between groups and fewer exacerbations were reported with salmeterol treatment. CONCLUSIONS The addition of salmeterol therapy to patients who remain symptomatic while using a low dose of FP was clinically and statistically superior to increasing the dose of FP.

Comparison of inhaled salmeterol and oral zafirlukast in patients with asthma

BACKGROUND Salmeterol, a long-acting beta2 -agonist, and zafirlukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, are both indicated for the treatment of asthma in adolescent and adult patients. OBJECTIVE We sought to compare the effect of 4 weeks of treatment with inhaled salmeterol xinafoate versus oral zafirlukast in the treatment of persistent asthma. METHODS This was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, multicenter clinical trial. Patients, over 80% of whom were on a concurrent inhaled corticosteroid regimen, were treated for 4 weeks with either inhaled salmeterol xinafoate 42 microgram twice daily administered by means of a metered-dose inhaler or oral zafirlukast 20 mg twice daily. The primary efficacy measure was morning peak expiratory flow (PEF); secondary efficacy measures included evening PEF, asthma symptom scores, supplemental albuterol use, nighttime awakenings, sleep symptoms, asthma exacerbations, and FEV1. RESULTS Both inhaled salmeterol and oral zafirlukast resulted in within-group improvements from baseline in measures of pulmonary function, asthma symptoms, and supplemental albuterol use. Salmeterol treatment resulted in significantly greater improvements from baseline compared with zafirlukast for most efficacy measurements, including morning PEF (29.6 vs 13.0 L/min; P </= .001), percentage of symptom-free days (22.4% vs 8.8%; P </= .001), and percentage of days and nights with no supplemental albuterol use (30.5% vs 11.3%; P </= .001). There were no differences in safety profiles as assessed by adverse event monitoring. CONCLUSION In patients with persistent asthma, most of whom were concurrently using inhaled corticosteroids, treatment with inhaled salmeterol provided significantly greater improvement than oral zafirlukast in overall asthma control over the 4-week treatment period.

Effect of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (250/50 μg) or salmeterol (50 μg) on COPD exacerbations

OBJECTIVES COPD exacerbations are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study evaluated the effect of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 and salmeterol 50 microg twice daily on moderate to severe exacerbations. METHODS Patients received standardized treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 during a 1-month run-in, followed by randomization to fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 or salmeterol for 12 months. Moderate to severe exacerbations were defined as worsening symptoms of COPD requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids, antibiotics, or hospitalization. RESULTS In 782 patients with COPD (mean FEV(1)=0.94+/-0.36 L, 33% predicted normal), treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 significantly reduced (1) the annual rate of moderate to severe exacerbations by 30.5% compared with salmeterol (1.06 and 1.53 per subject per year, respectively, p<0.001), (2) the risk of time to first exacerbation by 25% (hazard ratio=0.750, p=0.003) and (3) the annual rate of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids by 40% (p<0.001). Clinical improvements observed during run-in treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 were better maintained over 12 months with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 than salmeterol. Adverse events were reported for a similar percentage of subjects across groups. A higher reporting of pneumonia was observed with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 than salmeterol (7% vs. 4%). CONCLUSIONS We conclude that fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 is more effective than salmeterol at reducing the rate of moderate to severe exacerbations over 1 year. The benefits of this reduction relative to the risk of a higher incidence of reported pneumonia should be considered. This study supports the use of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 for the reduction of COPD exacerbations in patients with COPD.

A randomized, double-blind dose-ranging study of the novel LAMA GSK573719 in patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND This study evaluated the dose-response and dosing interval of the novel long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonist (LAMA) GSK573719 in patients with COPD. METHODS This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 3-way cross-over, incomplete block study evaluated 5 once-daily doses of GSK573719 (62.5-1000 μg), 3 twice-daily doses (62.5-250 μg), and open-label tiotropium for 14 days in patients (N = 176) with COPD (FEV(1) of 35-70% predicted). The primary endpoint was morning trough FEV(1) at Day 15. Secondary endpoints included 0-24 h weighted mean FEV(1) and serial FEV(1) values over 28 h. Safety measures and pharmacokinetics were assessed. RESULTS All once-daily doses of GSK573719 significantly increased trough FEV(1) at Day 15 with improvements ranging from 95 to 186 mL over placebo (p ≤ 0.006), from 79 to 172 mL with twice-daily dosing (p ≤ 0.03), and 105 mL with tiotropium (p = 0.003). No clear dose ordering was observed. Once-daily doses significantly (p < 0.001) increased 0-24 h weighted mean FEV(1) at Day 14 by 131-143 mL over placebo, comparable to increases with the twice-daily doses (120-142 mL) and tiotropium (127 mL). Significant reductions in rescue albuterol use and improvements in FVC were also observed with once-daily dosing. Plasma C(max) occurred within 5-15 min of dosing after which the drug was rapidly cleared and eliminated. GSK573719 was well tolerated, with no apparent treatment-related changes in vital signs, ECG and Holter assessments, or clinical laboratory parameters. CONCLUSION Once-daily dosing with GSK573719 in COPD provides clinically significant and sustained improvement in lung function over 24 h with similar efficacy to twice-daily dosing.

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.

Lung function and symptom improvement with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol and ipratropium bromide/albuterol in COPD: Response by beta-agonist reversibility ☆

This retrospective analysis of data from two multi-center, randomized, double-blind, parallel group studies compared the efficacy of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FSC) 250/50 mcg twice daily with ipratropium bromide/albuterol (IB/ALB) 36/206 mcg four times daily in albuterol-reversible (n=320 [44%]) and non-reversible (n=399 [56%]) patients with COPD. In reversible and non-reversible patients, both treatments significantly increased FEV(1)AUC(0-6h) from baseline and the magnitude of improvement was larger in reversible patients. FSC increased FEV(1)AUC(0-6h) by 1.46+/-0.08 and 1.98+/-0.13 l-h at Day 1 and Week 8, respectively, in reversible patients, compared with 0.71+/-0.06 and 0.94+/-0.10 l-h in non-reversible patients (p<0.001). With IB/ALB, increases were 1.46+/-0.08 and 1.19+/-0.11 l-h at Day 1 in reversible patients and Week 8, respectively, and 0.89+/-0.06 and 0.74+/-0.09 l-h (p < or = 0.041) in non-reversible patients. After 8 weeks, in both the reversible and non-reversible populations, the FEV(1) AUC(0-6h) significantly increased with FSC treatment (p < or = 0.002) and significantly decreased with IB/ALB (p < or = 0.010). In both reversibility groups, improvement in Transition Dyspnea Index (TDI) scores, overall daytime diary symptom scores and nocturnal symptom measures were significantly greater with FSC treatment compared with IB/ALB (p < or = 0.044). Reversibility status was not predictive of the magnitude of reduction in symptom scores. We conclude that both reversible and non-reversible patients receive greater clinical benefit with FSC compared with IB/ALB and acute bronchodilator reversibility is not useful for differentiating patients based on symptomatic responses to FSC compared with IB/ALB.

Dose response of umeclidinium administered once or twice daily in patients with COPD: A pooled analysis of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies

Umeclidinium (UMEC) is an inhaled long‐acting muscarinic antagonist approved in the US and EU for the once‐daily (QD) treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); it is not indicated for the treatment of asthma. To fully characterize the dose–response relationship of UMEC in patients with COPD, a pooled analysis of data from two randomized, placebo‐controlled, cross‐over, dose‐ranging studies was performed, evaluating UMEC at doses of 15.6–1000 mcg QD and 15.6–250 mcg twice daily (BID). The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) at the end of each studys treatment period (Day 8/Day 15). A population model‐based analysis using total daily UMEC dose was used for the primary analysis comparing QD and BID dosing. A physiological effect (Emax) model was optimal in defining the relationship between UMEC dose and the primary endpoint, demonstrating a clear monotonic dose response over QD and BID dosing regimens. UMEC doses ≥62.5 mcg QD were differentiated from lower doses and BID dosing did not provide benefit over QD dosing. The potency (ED50) estimate was 33 mcg with QD dosing. These data indicate that UMEC 62.5 mcg and 125 mcg QD provide lung function benefits that warrant further investigation for the treatment of COPD.

Effect of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (250/50μg) or salmeterol (50μg) on COPD exacerbations

OBJECTIVES COPD exacerbations are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study evaluated the effect of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 and salmeterol 50 microg twice daily on moderate to severe exacerbations. METHODS Patients received standardized treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 during a 1-month run-in, followed by randomization to fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 or salmeterol for 12 months. Moderate to severe exacerbations were defined as worsening symptoms of COPD requiring treatment with oral corticosteroids, antibiotics, or hospitalization. RESULTS In 782 patients with COPD (mean FEV(1)=0.94+/-0.36 L, 33% predicted normal), treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 significantly reduced (1) the annual rate of moderate to severe exacerbations by 30.5% compared with salmeterol (1.06 and 1.53 per subject per year, respectively, p<0.001), (2) the risk of time to first exacerbation by 25% (hazard ratio=0.750, p=0.003) and (3) the annual rate of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids by 40% (p<0.001). Clinical improvements observed during run-in treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 were better maintained over 12 months with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 than salmeterol. Adverse events were reported for a similar percentage of subjects across groups. A higher reporting of pneumonia was observed with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 than salmeterol (7% vs. 4%). CONCLUSIONS We conclude that fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 is more effective than salmeterol at reducing the rate of moderate to severe exacerbations over 1 year. The benefits of this reduction relative to the risk of a higher incidence of reported pneumonia should be considered. This study supports the use of fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 250/50 for the reduction of COPD exacerbations in patients with COPD.

40 Low-dose inhaled fluticasone propionate provides greater asthma symptom control as compared with oral zafirlukast in patients with persistent asthma

40 Low-Dose Inhaled Fluticasone Propionate Provides Greater Asthma Symptom Control as Compared With Oral Zaftrlukast in Patients With Persistent Asthma Michael Welch*, Christopher Kalbergf, Lisa Edwardsf, Marty Johnsonf. Kathy Rickardf *Allergy 19 Asthma Medical Group, San Diego, CA tGlaxo Wellcome, Research Triangle Park, NC The NIH guidelines for asthma management recognize inhaled corticosteroids as the most effective controller medications for the treatment of the inflammatory component of persistent asthma. Leukotrienes are a relatively new class of controller medications, but their position in asthma therapy is not fully established. In this l2week study, the effect of a low dose of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP, 88mcg BID) on asthma symptom control was compared with oral zafulukast (ZAF, 20mg BID) in patients 5 I2 years of age with persistent asthma. Eligible patients used only short-acting beta2-agonists prior to study entry and demonstrated signs of inadequate asthma control. Baseline FEV I values (expressed as percent of predicted normal) were 67% in the FP group. and 68% in the ZAF group. Treatment with FP resulted in significantly greater improvements in all measures of asthma symptom control compared with ZAF.