Ronald Dahl
Odense University Hospital
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Ronald Dahl.
Allergy | 2008
Jean Bousquet; N. Khaltaev; A. A. Cruz; J. Denburg; W. J. Fokkens; A. Togias; T. Zuberbier; Carlos E. Baena-Cagnani; G. W. Canonica; C. van Weel; Ioana Agache; N. Aït-Khaled; C. Bachert; M. S. Blaiss; S. Bonini; Louis Philippe Boulet; P. J. Bousquet; P. Camargos; K.-H. Carlsen; Y. Chen; Adnan Custovic; Ronald Dahl; P. Demoly; H. Douagui; Stephen R. Durham; R. Gerth van Wijk; O. Kalayci; M. A. Kaliner; Y. Y. Kim; M. L. Kowalski
J. Bousquet, N. Khaltaev, A. A. Cruz, J. Denburg, W. J. Fokkens, A. Togias, T. Zuberbier, C. E. Baena-Cagnani, G. W. Canonica, C. van Weel, I. Agache, N. A t-Khaled, C. Bachert, M. S. Blaiss, S. Bonini, L.-P. Boulet, P.-J. Bousquet, P. Camargos, K.-H. Carlsen, Y. Chen, A. Custovic, R. Dahl, P. Demoly, H. Douagui, S. R. Durham, R. Gerth van Wijk, O. Kalayci, M. A. Kaliner, Y.-Y. Kim, M. L. Kowalski, P. Kuna, L. T. T. Le, C. Lemiere, J. Li, R. F. Lockey, S. Mavale-Manuel , E. O. Meltzer, Y. Mohammad, J. Mullol, R. Naclerio, R. E. O Hehir, K. Ohta, S. Ouedraogo, S. Palkonen, N. Papadopoulos, G. Passalacqua, R. Pawankar, T. A. Popov, K. F. Rabe, J. Rosado-Pinto, G. K. Scadding, F. E. R. Simons, E. Toskala, E. Valovirta, P. van Cauwenberge, D.-Y. Wang, M. Wickman, B. P. Yawn, A. Yorgancioglu, O. M. Yusuf, H. Zar Review Group: I. Annesi-Maesano, E. D. Bateman, A. Ben Kheder, D. A. Boakye, J. Bouchard, P. Burney, W. W. Busse, M. Chan-Yeung, N. H. Chavannes, A. Chuchalin, W. K. Dolen, R. Emuzyte, L. Grouse, M. Humbert, C. Jackson, S. L. Johnston, P. K. Keith, J. P. Kemp, J.-M. Klossek, D. Larenas-Linnemann, B. Lipworth, J.-L. Malo, G. D. Marshall, C. Naspitz, K. Nekam, B. Niggemann, E. Nizankowska-Mogilnicka, Y. Okamoto, M. P. Orru, P. Potter, D. Price, S. W. Stoloff, O. Vandenplas, G. Viegi, D. Williams
Allergy | 2008
Jean Bousquet; N. Khaltaev; Alvaro A. Cruz; Judah A. Denburg; W. J. Fokkens; Alkis Togias; T. Zuberbier; Carlos E. Baena-Cagnani; G. W. Canonica; C. van Weel; Ioana Agache; N. Aït-Khaled; Claus Bachert; Michael S. Blaiss; Sergio Bonini; Louis-Philippe Boulet; P.-J. Bousquet; Paulo Augusto Moreira Camargos; K.-H. Carlsen; Yijing Chen; Adnan Custovic; Ronald Dahl; P. Demoly; H. Douagui; Stephen R. Durham; R. Gerth van Wijk; O. Kalayci; Michael Kaliner; Y.‐Y. Kim; M. L. Kowalski
J. Bousquet, N. Khaltaev, A. A. Cruz, J. Denburg, W. J. Fokkens, A. Togias, T. Zuberbier, C. E. Baena-Cagnani, G. W. Canonica, C. van Weel, I. Agache, N. A t-Khaled, C. Bachert, M. S. Blaiss, S. Bonini, L.-P. Boulet, P.-J. Bousquet, P. Camargos, K.-H. Carlsen, Y. Chen, A. Custovic, R. Dahl, P. Demoly, H. Douagui, S. R. Durham, R. Gerth van Wijk, O. Kalayci, M. A. Kaliner, Y.-Y. Kim, M. L. Kowalski, P. Kuna, L. T. T. Le, C. Lemiere, J. Li, R. F. Lockey, S. Mavale-Manuel , E. O. Meltzer, Y. Mohammad, J. Mullol, R. Naclerio, R. E. O Hehir, K. Ohta, S. Ouedraogo, S. Palkonen, N. Papadopoulos, G. Passalacqua, R. Pawankar, T. A. Popov, K. F. Rabe, J. Rosado-Pinto, G. K. Scadding, F. E. R. Simons, E. Toskala, E. Valovirta, P. van Cauwenberge, D.-Y. Wang, M. Wickman, B. P. Yawn, A. Yorgancioglu, O. M. Yusuf, H. Zar Review Group: I. Annesi-Maesano, E. D. Bateman, A. Ben Kheder, D. A. Boakye, J. Bouchard, P. Burney, W. W. Busse, M. Chan-Yeung, N. H. Chavannes, A. Chuchalin, W. K. Dolen, R. Emuzyte, L. Grouse, M. Humbert, C. Jackson, S. L. Johnston, P. K. Keith, J. P. Kemp, J.-M. Klossek, D. Larenas-Linnemann, B. Lipworth, J.-L. Malo, G. D. Marshall, C. Naspitz, K. Nekam, B. Niggemann, E. Nizankowska-Mogilnicka, Y. Okamoto, M. P. Orru, P. Potter, D. Price, S. W. Stoloff, O. Vandenplas, G. Viegi, D. Williams
The New England Journal of Medicine | 2014
Helgo Magnussen; Bernd Disse; Roberto Rodriguez-Roisin; Anne Kirsten; Henrik Watz; Kay Tetzlaff; Lesley Towse; Helen Finnigan; Ronald Dahl; Marc Decramer; Pascal Chanez
BACKGROUND Treatment with inhaled glucocorticoids in combination with long-acting bronchodilators is recommended in patients with frequent exacerbations of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the benefit of inhaled glucocorticoids in addition to two long-acting bronchodilators has not been fully explored. METHODS In this 12-month, double-blind, parallel-group study, 2485 patients with a history of exacerbation of COPD received triple therapy consisting of tiotropium (at a dose of 18 μg once daily), salmeterol (50 μg twice daily), and the inhaled glucocorticoid fluticasone propionate (500 μg twice daily) during a 6-week run-in period. Patients were then randomly assigned to continued triple therapy or withdrawal of fluticasone in three steps over a 12-week period. The primary end point was the time to the first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation. Spirometric findings, health status, and dyspnea were also monitored. RESULTS As compared with continued glucocorticoid use, glucocorticoid withdrawal met the prespecified noninferiority criterion of 1.20 for the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (CI) with respect to the first moderate or severe COPD exacerbation (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.19). At week 18, when glucocorticoid withdrawal was complete, the adjusted mean reduction from baseline in the trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 38 ml greater in the glucocorticoid-withdrawal group than in the glucocorticoid-continuation group (P<0.001); a similar between-group difference (43 ml) was seen at week 52 (P=0.001). No change in dyspnea and minor changes in health status occurred in the glucocorticoid-withdrawal group. CONCLUSIONS In patients with severe COPD receiving tiotropium plus salmeterol, the risk of moderate or severe exacerbations was similar among those who discontinued inhaled glucocorticoids and those who continued glucocorticoid therapy. However, there was a greater decrease in lung function during the final step of glucocorticoid withdrawal. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma; WISDOM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00975195.).
Thorax | 2010
Ronald Dahl; Kian Fan Chung; Roland Buhl; Helgo Magnussen; Vladimir Nonikov; Damon Jack; Patricia Bleasdale; Roger Owen; Mark Higgins; Benjamin Kramer
Background Indacaterol is a long-acting inhaled β2-agonist (LABA) for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In previous studies, indacaterol provided 24 h bronchodilation on once-daily dosing with a fast onset of action. This study compared the efficacy and safety of indacaterol with the twice-daily LABA formoterol and placebo over 1 year. Methods Patients with moderate to severe COPD were randomised to receive once-daily indacaterol 300 μg (n=437) or 600 μg (n=428), twice-daily formoterol 12 μg (n=435) or placebo (n=432) for 52 weeks in a double-blind double-dummy parallel group study. The primary efficacy variable was forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) measured 24 h postdose after 12 weeks (indacaterol vs placebo). Other outcomes included dyspnoea (transition dyspnoea index, TDI), use of as-needed salbutamol, symptom-based measures recorded on diary cards, exacerbations, health status (St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire), BODE index (body mass index, obstruction, dyspnoea, exercise), safety and tolerability. Results Indacaterol increased 24 h postdose FEV1 after 12 weeks by 170 ml (both doses) versus placebo and by 100 ml versus formoterol (all p<0.001). These significant differences were maintained at 52 weeks. Symptomatic outcomes were improved compared with placebo with all active treatments, and indacaterol was more effective than formoterol in improving TDI score and reducing the need for as-needed salbutamol. Indacaterol was well tolerated and had a good overall safety profile, including minimal impact on QTc interval and systemic β2-mediated events. Conclusions Once-daily indacaterol is an effective 24 h bronchodilator that improves symptoms and health status and confers clinical improvements over a twice-daily 12 h LABA as a treatment for patients with moderate to severe COPD. Trial registration number NCT 00393458.
The New England Journal of Medicine | 2013
Robert A. Wise; Antonio Anzueto; Daniel Cotton; Ronald Dahl; Theresa Devins; Bernd Disse; Daniel Dusser; Elizabeth Joseph; Sabine Kattenbeck; Michael Koenen-Bergmann; Gordon Pledger; Peter Calverley
BACKGROUND Tiotropium delivered at a dose of 5 μg with the Respimat inhaler showed efficacy similar to that of 18 μg of tiotropium delivered with the HandiHaler inhalation device in placebo-controlled trials involving patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Although tiotropium HandiHaler was associated with reduced mortality, as compared with placebo, more deaths were reported with tiotropium Respimat than with placebo. METHODS In this randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial involving 17,135 patients with COPD, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat at a once-daily dose of 2.5 μg or 5 μg, as compared with tiotropium HandiHaler at a once-daily dose of 18 μg. Primary end points were the risk of death (noninferiority study, Respimat at a dose of 5 μg or 2.5 μg vs. HandiHaler) and the risk of the first COPD exacerbation (superiority study, Respimat at a dose of 5 μg vs. HandiHaler). We also assessed cardiovascular safety, including safety in patients with stable cardiac disease. RESULTS During a mean follow-up of 2.3 years, Respimat was noninferior to HandiHaler with respect to the risk of death (Respimat at a dose of 5 μg vs. HandiHaler: hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84 to 1.09; Respimat at a dose of 2.5 μg vs. HandiHaler: hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.14) and not superior to HandiHaler with respect to the risk of the first exacerbation (Respimat at a dose of 5 μg vs. HandiHaler: hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.03). Causes of death and incidences of major cardiovascular adverse events were similar in the three groups. CONCLUSIONS Tiotropium Respimat at a dose of 5 μg or 2.5 μg had a safety profile and exacerbation efficacy similar to those of tiotropium HandiHaler at a dose of 18 μg in patients with COPD. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; TIOSPIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01126437.).
Allergy | 2009
G. Walter Canonica; Jean Bousquet; Thomas B. Casale; Richard F. Lockey; Carlos E. Baena-Cagnani; Ruby Pawankar; Paul C. Potter; Philippe Jean Bousquet; Linda Cox; Stephen R. Durham; Harold S. Nelson; Giovanni Passalacqua; Dermot Ryan; Jan Brozek; Enrico Compalati; Ronald Dahl; Luís Delgado; Roy Gerth van Wijk; Richard G. Gower; Dennis K. Ledford; Nelson Augusto Rosário Filho; Erkka Valovirta; O. M. Yusuf; Torsten Zuberbier; Wahiduzzaman Akhanda; Raúl Lázaro Castro Almarales; Ignacio J. Ansotegui; Floriano Bonifazi; Jan Ceuppens; Tomás Chivato
Co-Authors: Wahiduzzaman Akhanda, Raul Castro Almarales, Ignacio Ansotegui, Floriano Bonifazi, Jan Ceuppens, Tomás Chivato, Darina Dimova, Diana Dumitrascu, Luigi Fontana, Constance HKatelaris, Ranbir Kaulsay, Piotr Kuna, Dèsirée Larenas-Linnemann, Manolis Manoussakis, Kristof Nekam, Carlos Nunes, Robyn O’Hehir, José M Olaguibel, Nerin Bahceciler Onder, JungWon Park, Alfred Priftanji, Robert Puy, Luis Sarmiento, Glenis Scadding, Peter Schmid-Grendelmeier, Ester Seberova, Revaz Sepiashvili, Dirceu Solé, Alkis Togias, Carlo Tomino, Elina Toskala, Hugo Van Beever, Stefan Vieths*
Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews | 1998
Niels Mygind; Ronald Dahl
In studying drug absorption from the nasal mucous membrane, it is essential to have a clear understanding of anatomy and physiology of the nose, and how it relates to the characteristics of the delivery system used. The human nose is characterized by an individually varying shape and caliber, which might interfere with standard recommendations of intranasal medication. It is also of significance that there is a tendency for reflex- induced and profuse watery hypersecretion from glands, and for quick and considerable changes of mucosal thickness due to the presence of large venous sinusoids. These are factors which can interfere with pharmacokinetics. Also mucociliary transport rate has to be taken into consideration, as the drug is removed from the absorptive mucous membrane within 30 min. Intranasal drug distribution has been poorly studied in relation to nasal anatomy and pathology. In contrast to common believe, nasal inflammation does not seem to increase drug absorption. On the contrary, blockage, sneezing and rhinorrhoea might preclude the absorption.
European Respiratory Journal | 2011
Oliver Kornmann; Ronald Dahl; Stefano Centanni; Angeli Dogra; Roger Owen; Cheryl Lassen; Benjamin Kramer
Indacaterol is a novel, inhaled, once-daily, ultra-long-acting &bgr;2-agonist bronchodilator recently approved in Europe for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of the present study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of indacaterol compared with placebo and the twice-daily &bgr;2-agonist, salmeterol, as an active control. Patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomised to 6 months double-blind treatment with indacaterol (150 &mgr;g once daily), salmeterol (50 &mgr;g twice daily) or placebo. The primary efficacy end-point was trough (24 h post-dose) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) after 12 weeks. 1,002 patients were randomised and 838 (84%) completed the study. Indacaterol increased trough FEV1 at week 12 by 170 mL over placebo (p<0.001) and by 60 mL over salmeterol (p<0.001). Both active treatments improved health status (St Georges Respiratory Questionnaire) and dyspnoea (transition dyspnoea index) compared with placebo, with differences between them favouring indacaterol. Safety profiles were similar across the treatment groups, and both indacaterol and salmeterol were well tolerated. Once-daily treatment with 150 &mgr;g indacaterol had a significant and clinically relevant bronchodilator effect over 24 h post-dose and improved health status and dyspnoea to a greater extent than twice-daily 50 &mgr;g salmeterol. Indacaterol should prove a useful additional treatment for patients with COPD.
Allergy | 2006
Ronald Dahl; A. Stender; Sabina Rak
Background: The best way to prevent allergy symptoms is to treat the allergic condition. Specific immunotherapy with grass allergen tablets 75 000 SQ‐T (Grazax®Phleum pratense, ALK‐Abelló) is safe and efficacious in rhinoconjunctivitis patients. As rhinoconjunctivitis often co‐exists with asthma, we aimed to confirm safety and efficacy in grass allergic subjects with asthma and rhinoconjunctivitis.
The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology | 1993
Lars Haugaard; Ronald Dahl; Lars Jacobsen
BACKGROUND Seventy-four asthmatic patients allergic to house dust mite were included in a double-blind, controlled study to establish the optimal maintenance dose of a standardized extract of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (Der p I) during 24 months of immunotherapy (IT). METHODS The patients were given the following maintenance doses: 19 patients 10,000 standardized quality units (SQ-U) (group 10, 0.7 microgram Der p I), 20 patients 100,000 SQ-U (group 100, 7 micrograms Der p I), 16 patients 300,000 SQ-U (group 300, 21 micrograms Der p I), and 19 control patients (group 0) had no injections. After 24 months bronchial challenge demonstrated a dose-related increased tolerance to Der p I, group 10 (p = 0.003), group 100 (p = 0.0005), group 300 (p = 0.0007), with no change in group 0 (p = 0.6). Patients given IT had a decrease in medication and peak expiratory flow score. In total, 2104 injections were given, and 3.5% were followed by a systemic reaction, defined as a fall 15% or greater in forced expiratory volume in 1 second within 30 minutes. A dose-response relation was demonstrated, with rates of systemic reactions in percent of injections; group 10, 0.56%; group 100, 3.30%; and group 300, 7.10% (p < 0.0001). No anaphylactic reactions occurred, and no late systemic reactions were observed. This study demonstrated a dose dependence of efficacy and side effects of IT in asthmatic patients. We suggest a maintenance dose of 100,000 SQ-U (7 micrograms Der p I) as an appropriate guideline for IT with house dust mite extract.
Collaboration
Dive into the Ronald Dahl's collaboration.
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
View shared research outputs