Stephen J. Langley

Secondary prevention of asthma by the use of Inhaled Fluticasone propionate in Wheezy INfants (IFWIN): double-blind, randomised, controlled study.

BACKGROUND Wheezing and asthma often begins in early childhood, but it is difficult to predict whether or not a wheezy infant will develop asthma. Some researchers suggest that treatment with inhaled corticosteroids at the first signs of wheezing in childhood could prevent the development of asthma later in life. However, other investigators have reported that although such treatment could help control symptoms, the benefits can disappear within months of stopping treatment. We tested our hypothesis that to prevent loss of lung function and worsening asthma later in childhood, anti-inflammatory treatment needs to be started early in life. METHODS We did a randomised, double-blind, controlled study of inhaled fluticasone propionate 100 mug twice daily in young children who were followed prospectively and randomised after either one prolonged (>1 month) or two medically confirmed wheezy episodes. The dose of study drug was reduced every 3 months to the minimum needed. If the symptoms were not under control by 3 months, open-label fluticasone propionate 100 mug twice daily was added to the treatment. Children were followed-up to 5 years of age, at which point we gave their parents or guardians questionnaires, and measured the childrens lung function (specific airways resistance [sR(aw)], forced expiratory volume in 1s [FEV1]) and airway reactivity (eucapnic voluntary hyperventilation [EVH] challenge). This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN86717853. FINDINGS We followed 1073 children prospectively, of whom 333 were eligible, and 200 of these began treatment (130 male, median age 1.2 years [range 0.5-4.9]; 101 placebo, 99 treatment); 173 (85 treatment, 88 placebo) completed the follow-up at age five years. The groups did not differ significantly in the proportion of children with current wheeze, physician-diagnosed asthma or use of asthma medication, lung function, or airway reactivity (percentage change in FEV1, adjusted mean for placebo 5.5% [95% CI -2.5 to 13.4]) vs for treatment 5.0% [-2.2 to 12.2], p=0.87). There were no differences in the results after adjustment for open-label fluticasone propionate, nor between the two groups in the time before the open-label drug was added (estimated hazard ratio 1.12 [95% CI 0.73-1.73], p=0.60), or the proportion needing the open-label drug (43 [42.57%] placebo, 41 [41.41%] treatment). INTERPRETATION The early use of inhaled fluticasone propionate for wheezing in preschool children had no effect on the natural history of asthma or wheeze later in childhood, and did not prevent lung function decline or reduce airway reactivity.

Comparison of pharmacokinetics and systemic effects of inhaled fluticasone propionate in patients with asthma and healthy volunteers: a randomised crossover study

BACKGROUND Inhaled corticosteroids are currently the cornerstone of asthma treatment. Some studies of high-dose fluticasone propionate in patients with no or mild asthma have, however, suggested substantial systemic absorption. We investigated the pharmacokinetics of fluticasone propionate in patients with asthma receiving appropriate doses for severity. METHODS We did a double-blind, randomised, crossover study in 11 patients with asthma and 13 matched healthy controls (age 20-65 years; asthma patients forced expiratory volume in 1 s <75% and stable on high-dose inhaled corticosteroids). Patients received one 1000 microg intravenous dose or 1000 microg daily for 7 days inhaled (via spacer device) fluticasone propionate. In the 12 h after dosing, we monitored plasma fluticasone propionate and cortisol concentrations by mass spectrometry and competitive immunoassay with use of direct chemiluminescence. Analysis was by intention to treat. FINDINGS After inhalation, geometric mean values were significantly lower in the asthma group than in controls for fluticasone propionate plasma area under curve (1082 [95% CI 850-1451] vs 2815 pg mL(-1) h(-1) [2262-3949], -62% difference [45-72]; p<0.001), maximum concentrations (117 [91-159] vs 383 pg/mL [302-546], -68% [-50 to -81]; p<0.001), and systemic bioavailability (10.1 [7.9-14.0] vs 21.4% [15.4-32.2], -54% [-27 to -70]; p=0.001). Intravenous-dose clearance, volume of distribution at steady state, plasma half-life, and mean residence time, were similar in the two groups. Less suppression of plasma cortisol concentrations was seen in the asthma group than in controls 4-12 h after inhaled fluticasone propionate. INTERPRETATION Systemic availability of fluticasone propionate is substantially less in patients with moderate to severe asthma than in healthy controls. Inhaled corticosteroids that are absorbed through the lungs need to be assessed in patients who are receiving doses appropriate for disease severity, and not in normal volunteers.

Montelukast versus salmeterol in patients with asthma and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction

BACKGROUND Montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist, and salmeterol, a long-acting beta(2)-receptor agonist, each have demonstrated benefits in the treatment of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) in short-term studies. Direct comparisons between these agents in long-term studies are limited. OBJECTIVE We sought to compare montelukast and salmeterol in the long-term treatment of EIB. METHODS One hundred ninety-seven patients with mild asthma and a postexercise fall in FEV(1) of at least 18% were randomized (double-blind) to receive montelukast 10 mg once daily or salmeterol 50 microg twice daily for 8 weeks. Exercise challenge was repeated at day 3, week 4, and week 8 after randomization near the end of the dosing interval for both drugs. The primary efficacy endpoint was the maximal percent fall in postexercise FEV(1) at week 8. RESULTS Montelukast was effective in treating EIB without inducing tolerance and provided superior (P </=.001) protection than salmeterol at weeks 4 and 8, with comparable protection at day 3. The frequency of respiratory clinical adverse events (P =.046) and discontinuations because of clinical adverse events (P =.052) were less with montelukast. CONCLUSION The effect of montelukast was greater than that of salmeterol in the chronic treatment of EIB over a period of 8 weeks in patients with mild asthma as demonstrated by effect size, maintenance of effect, and fewer respiratory clinical adverse events during the study period. Montelukast may be a better alternative to salmeterol as a controller agent for the chronic treatment of EIB.

Relationship among pulmonary function, bronchial reactivity, and exhaled nitric oxide in a large group of asthmatic patients

BACKGROUND Bronchial reactivity and exhaled nitric oxide (eNO) are not often used to monitor control and severity of asthma in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the relationship among different physiologic measures (pulmonary function, nonspecific bronchial reactivity, and eNO) in asthmatic patients. METHODS Cross-sectional, hospital-based study conducted in patients with varied asthma severity. RESULTS A total of 392 patients participated in the study. There was no difference in eNO levels between patients taking inhaled corticosteroids (ICS group) and patients not receiving inhaled corticosteroids (NICS group). However, the percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and the provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% decrease in FEV1 were significantly lower in the ICS group compared with the NICS group (mean, 83.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 80.4%-86.0%; vs mean, 94.1%; 95% CI, 91.1%-97.1%; P = .001; and geometric mean, 0.32 mg; 95% CI, 0.23-0.45 mg; vs geometric mean, 0.58 mg; 95% CI, 0.42-0.81 mg; P = .01; respectively). Patients with more severe bronchial hyperresponsiveness had a lower percentage of predicted FEV1 values (P < .001) and levels of eNO were significantly increased with increasing bronchial hyperresponsiveness (P < .001). There was no relationship between the percentage of predicted FEV1 and eNO. Atopic patients had significantly higher eNO levels than nonatopic patients (geometric mean, 11.21 ppb; 95% CI, 10.07-12.49 ppb; vs geometric mean, 7.76 ppb; 95% CI, 6.11-9.85 ppb; P = .006; respectively). CONCLUSIONS eNO values are not related to the degree of airway obstruction but are related to airway reactivity and atopic status independent of inhaled corticosteroid use. Higher values of eNO are seen with increased airway reactivity.

The use of plethysmography and oscillometry to compare long‐acting bronchodilators in patients with COPD

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) is the standard measurement used to measure drug effects in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) clinical trials. Having previously shown that specific airway conductance (sGaw) measured using body plethysmography and impulse oscillometry (IOS) are more sensitive than FEV(1) for assessing short-acting bronchodilator effects in patients with COPD, we conducted the first randomized, placebo-controlled study to compare long-acting bronchodilators in COPD patients using these techniques. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS sGaw and IOS sensitively differentiated between the effects of tiotropium and salmeterol when FEV(1) measurements were similar. sGaw and IOS measurements are better than FEV(1) for sensitively assessing bronchodilator pharmacology and differentiating between treatments in COPD clinical trials. AIMS Assessment of bronchodilator pharmacology in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may be improved by using more sensitive methods than spirometry, such as impulse oscillometry (IOS) and body plethysmography. We sought to compare salmeterol (S) and tiotropium (Tio) using these methods. METHODS In this double-blind, randomized, four-way crossover study, 32 COPD patients received single doses of Tio (18 microg), S (50 and 100 microg) or placebo. Specific airway conductance (sGaw), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) and IOS were measured pre- and up to 26 h postdose. Comparisons between treatments were analysed by weighted means (WM) between 0 and 12 (WM 0-12 h) and 12-24 h (WM 12-24 h) postdose. Data are expressed as mean difference (or geometric ratio for nonparametric data) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS Tio and S100 significantly improved FEV(1), sGaw and IOS parameters up to 26 h and S50 up to 16 h. WM analysis showed no difference between Tio and S100 in FEV(1) for 0-12 h or 12-24 h. Maximum mid-expiratory flow (-0.06; -0.11, -0.01) and R35 (0.02; 0.01, 0.03) demonstrated superiority of S100 compared with Tio for WM 0-12 h sGaw (1.12; 1.02, 1.23), R5 (-0.06; -0.09, -0.02), R15 (-0.03; -0.05, -0.01), and resonant frequency (RF) (-2.30; -3.83, -0.77) showed superiority of Tio compared with S100 for WM 12-24 h. At 26 h, sGaw, R5, R15, X5 and RF also showed superiority of Tio compared with S100. CONCLUSIONS sGaw and IOS parameters sensitively differentiated between the effects of Tio and S when FEV(1) measurements were similar. Clinical trials in patients with COPD should use IOS and sGaw to assess comprehensively bronchodilator pharmacology.

A comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of single doses of HFA 134a albuterol and CFC albuterol in mild-to-moderate asthmatic patients

BACKGROUND After the signing of the Montreal Protocol in 1987, new propellants for use in pressurized metered-dose inhalers that are non-ozone-depleting have been developed. OBJECTIVE This study was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of single doses of albuterol/HFA 134a with albuterol/CFC and to demonstrate a dose-response among the different doses of both formulations. METHODS A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study. Sixty-three adolescent and adult asthmatic patients were randomized to receive at separate treatment visits single doses via a pressurized metered-dose inhaler of either placebo/hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) 134a; 100 microg, 200 microg, or 400 microg albuterol/HFA 134a; 100 microg or 200 microg albuterol/chlorofluorocarbon (CFC). Triplicate measurements of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) were made immediately before dosing and 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 hours postdose. The primary efficacy variables were area under the entire 6-hour FEV1 curve, relative to baseline subtracted from the area above baseline (AUC(0-6)) and peak effect (derived from serial FEV1 measurements). RESULTS Analysis of AUC(0-6) and peak effect showed that all doses of albuterol had a significantly greater effect than placebo (HFA 134a propellant). Comparisons of the two formulations at 100 microg and 200 microg showed no difference in AUC(0-6) (100 microg, -0.23 Lhr, P = 0.114 and 200 microg -0.08 Lhr, P = 0.590) or in peak effect, percentage of baseline (100 microg, -1.3%, P = 0.354 and 200 microg, 0.17%, P = 0.902). There were no differences seen among formulations in the incidence of adverse events or with any of the other safety parameters, including electrocardiograms, vital signs, clinical laboratory assessments, and asthma exacerbations. CONCLUSIONS The study demonstrated comparability in terms of efficacy and safety between albuterol/HFA 134a and albuterol/CFC.

Comparison of the effects of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate with fluticasone propionate on airway physiology in adults with mild persistent asthma

BackgroundThis study compared the effect of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) with the combination of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SFC) on lung function parameters in patients with mild asthma.MethodsAdult patients with mild persistent asthma (≥ 80% predicted FEV1) receiving 200–500 μg of BDP or equivalent were randomised to receive either FP 100 μg or SFC 50/100 μg twice daily from a Diskus® inhaler for four weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in airway resistance (sRaw) at 12 hrs post dose measured by whole body plethysmography. Impulse oscillometry and spirometry were also performed.ResultsA comparison of the geometric mean sRaw at 12 hrs post dose in the SFC group to the FP group gave a ratio of 0.76 (0.66 – 0.89, p < 0.001) at week 2 and 0.81 (0.71 – 0.94, p = 0.006) at week 4. Similarly, significant results in favour of SFC for oscillometry measurements of resistance and reactance were observed. FEV1 was also significantly superior at week 2 in the SFC group (mean difference 0.16L, 95% CI; 0.03 – 0.28, p = 0.015), but not at week 4 (mean difference 0.17L, 95% CI -0.01 – 0.34, p = 0.060).ConclusionSFC is superior to FP in reducing airway resistance in mild asthmatics with near normal FEV1 values. This study provides evidence that changes in pulmonary function in patients with mild asthma are detected more sensitively by plethysmography compared to spirometryTrial registration numberNCT00370591.

Absence of effect of ranitidine on blood alcohol concentrations when taken morning, midday, or evening with or without food

To investigate the effects of multiple dosing with ranitidine (300 mg four times a day) on the absorption of a moderate dose of alcohol (0.5 gm · kg−1), consumed postprandially or on an empty stomach at different times of day, and to investigate if coadministration of ranitidine affects psychomotor function.

Inhaled steroid/long-acting β2 agonist combination products provide 24 hours improvement in lung function in adult asthmatic patients

BackgroundThe combination of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) is recommended by treatment guidelines for the treatment of persistent asthma. Two such combination products, salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SFC, Seretide™ GSK, UK) and formoterol/budesonide (FBC, Symbicort™, AstraZeneca, UK) are commercially available.ObjectivesThe purpose of these studies was to evaluate and compare the duration of bronchodilation of both combination products up to 24 hours after a single dose.MethodsTwo randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies were performed. Study A was conducted in 33 asthmatic adults receiving 400–1200 mcg of budesonide or equivalent. Serial forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was measured over 24 hours to determine the duration of effect of both SFC (50/100 mcg) and FBC (4.5/160 mcg). Study B was conducted in 75 asthmatic adults receiving 800–1200 mcg of budesonide or equivalent and comprised a 4 week run-in of 400 mcg bd Becotide™ followed by 4 weeks treatment with either SFC 50/100 mcg bd or FBC 4.5/160 mcg bd taken in a cross-over manner. Serial 24-hour FEV1 was measured after the first dose and the last dose after each 4-weeks treatment period to determine the offset of action of each treatment.ResultsIn study A, a single inhalation of SFC and FBC produced a sustained bronchodilation at 16 hours with an adjusted mean increase in FEV1 from pre-dose of 0.22 L (95% CI 0.19, 0.35 L) for SFC and 0.25 L (95% CI 0.21, 0.37 L) for FBC, which was significantly greater than placebo for both treatments (-0.05 L; p < 0.001). In study B, the slope of decline in FEV1 from 2–24 hours post dose was -16.0 ml/hr for SFC and -14.2 ml/hr for FBC. The weighted mean AUC over 24 hours was 0.21 Lxmin and 0.22 Lxmin and mean change from pre-dose FEV1 at 12 hours was 0.21 L for SFC and 0.20 L for FBC respectivelyConclusionBoth SFC and FBC produced a similar sustained bronchodilator effect which was prolonged beyond 12 hours post dose and was clearly measurable at 24 h.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interaction between the antidepressant tianeptine and oxazepam at steady-state

To assess if any pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction at steady-state occurs between the new antidepressant tianeptine and a benzodiazepine (oxazepam) following multiple oral dosing of both drugs, 12 healthy male volunteers entered a balanced three-way double blind cross-over study. Tianeptine (12.5 mg) and/or oxazepam (10 mg) were given three times daily for 4 days. Pharmacokinetic data within a dosing interval at steady-state showed that there were no statistically significant changes in the pharmacokinetics of either tianeptine (and its two major metabolites) or oxazepam when both drugs were co-administered. Psychometric data showed that there was no synergistic negative interaction between the two drugs and that their combination may result in beneficial effects on “alertness” and “happiness”