A study was done to compare the efficacy and safety of the coprescription of salmeterol 50 microgram twice daily or 100 microgram twice daily with beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) 500 micrograms twice daily (SALM 50 and SALM 100) with BDP 1,000 microgram twice daily (BDP 1,000) in patients with asthma not controlled by BDP 500 microgram twice daily (or the equivalent). Following a run-in period, 738 patients at 72 centers were randomized to treatment for 24 wk in a double-blind, parallel-group study during which they maintained a daily record of peak expiratory flow rates (PEFRs) and symptom scores. At about 40 of the centers, bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) to histamine was measured during and at 3 and 14 d after stopping treatment. Both groups taking salmeterol showed an improvement of more than 45 L/min in their morning PEFR and 30 L/min in their evening PEFR, compared with respective improvements of 16 L/min and 6 L/min in the group taking BDP 1,000. Both the SALM 50 and SALM 100 groups had a significantly increased percentage of symptom-free and rescue-free days and nights compared with the BDP 1,000 group, and there was no difference between the two salmeterol groups. None of the treatments altered BHR. Exacerbation rates did not differ among the three groups. We conclude that in this selected group of symptomatic patients taking BDP 500 micrograms twice daily, the addition of salmeterol provides better improvement in lung function and symptom control, without altering BHR or increasing exacerbation rates, than does doubling the dose of BDP.
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination product (SFC) with fluticasone propionate (FP) plus oral montelukast (M) over 12 weeks in symptomatic asthma patients. The study was a multinational, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group design in patients aged > or = 15 years. After a 4-week run-in during which all patients received FP 100 microg twice daily, patients were randomised to inhaled SFC (50/100 microg) twice daily or inhaled FP 100 microg twice daily and oral M 10 mg once daily. Patients kept daily records of their peak expiratory flow (PEF) symptom scores and use of rescue medication. Over the 12-week treatment period, the adjusted increase in mean morning PEF was significantly greater in the SFC group (36 l/min) than the FP/M group (19 l/min; P < 0.001). The improvement in FEV1 was also significantly greater in the SFC group (mean treatment difference 0.11 l; P < 0.001). SFC provided significantly better control of daytime and night-time symptoms and there were fewer exacerbations. Patients in the SFC group were also significantly more likely to have a rescue-free day. Both treatments were equally well tolerated. Combination therapy with FP plus salmeterol (SFC) produced significantly greater improvements in lung function and asthma control than the addition of montelukastto FP.
OBJECTIVE:To compare the efficacy and safety of a new combination Diskus inhaler containing both salmeterol 50 mg and fluticasone propionate 250 mg (Seretide) with the two drugs delivered via separate Diskus inhalers. DESIGN: A multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy study. Three hundred and seventy-one symptomatic asthma patients (age range 13 to 75 years, mean 42 years) receiving inhaled corticosteroids were randomly assigned to two treatement groups: 28 weeks' treatment with either salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (50/250 mg bid) via a single Diskus inhaler (combination) and placebo bid via another Diskus inhaler, or salmeterol 50 mg bid via one Diskus inhaler and fluticasone propionate 250 mg bid via another (concurrent). Morning peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) and symptoms were measured for the first 12 weeks and safety data were collected throughout the study. RESULTS: Over weeks 1 to 12, adjusted mean improvements in morning PEFR were 43 and 36 L/min for combination and concurrent therapies, respectively. The difference between the two treatment arms was 6 L/min (90% CI -13 to 0 L/min; P=0.114), which was within the predefined criteria for clinical equivalence. Adjusted mean improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 s from baseline for week 28 were also similar between the two therapies. Thirty-five per cent of patients receiving combination inhaler and 31% of those receiving concurrent therapy had a mean daytime symptom score of zero over weeks 1 to 12 compared with 1% and 2%, respectively, at baseline. There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two treatment arms. Mean serum cortisol levels were similar, and no differences in frequency of abnormal results were noted between the two groups.
The aim of the study was to investigate the time of onset and the duration of the bronchodilating effect of different doses of formoterol administered via Turbuhaler in patients with moderate asthma. Thirty-one patients (five women) with a mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of 1.97 +/- 0.54 1 and a mean reversibility of 31 +/- 14% of baseline were included in this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled and cross-over study. The patients inhaled single doses of placebo, i.e. 6, 12, 24, or 48 micrograms formoterol fumarate, on 5 separate days. Serial measurements of specific airways conductance (SGAW) and FEV1 were performed at regular time intervals for 12 h. The majority of the patients had at least a 50% increase in SGAW within 1-4 min after administration of all active treatments. The maximum increase in FEV1 over placebo was dose-dependent: 12% (6 micrograms), 18% (12 micrograms), 19% (24 micrograms), and 26% (48 micrograms) (P < 0.001). Twelve hours after administration of 6, 12, 24, and 48 micrograms formoterol, the mean increase in FEV1 was still 7%, 15%, 18%, and 27%, respectively, above the value following placebo. Headache was the most frequently reported adverse event in all treatments including placebo. After inhalation of 48 micrograms, three patients experienced mild tremor lasting for less than 1 h; likewise, one patient experienced the same event for 3 h after placebo. Formoterol administered via Turbuhaler10 gave a rapid and dose-related bronchodilating effect lasting for 12 h and was well tolerated.
A total of 261 patients with symptomatic, mild to moderate asthma were randomized to treatment in this 4-week, double-blind, parallel-group comparison of fluticasone propionate 200 micrograms/d with beclomethasone dipropionate 400 micrograms/d. Improvements from both treatments were seen in diary card data. Morning peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) improved from 375 to 390 and 371 to 382 l/min with fluticasone propionate and beclomethasone dipropionate, respectively. Symptom scores, percentage of symptom-free days and nights, and use of rescue beta 2-agonist medication also improved, as did clinical lung function. With the exception of percentage of rescue-free days, which was greater for beclomethasone dipropionate, none of the differences between the groups were statistically significant. There was a significant difference between treatments in the number of rescue-free days over days 1-28; however, there was no difference between treatments in the number of rescue-free days over days 1-14, nor was there any difference in the number of inhalations of rescue medication used throughout the study. Very few adverse effects were reported. Although all mean plasma cortisol values were within the normal range, they were significantly different between treatments, rising from 402 to 429 nmol/l with fluticasone propionate, and falling from 435 to 394 nmol/l with beclomethasone dipropionate (P = 0.006). Mean stimulated cortisol levels 30 min after tetracosactin injection were also significantly greater with fluticasone propionate (P = 0.024). In conclusion, fluticasone propionate 200 micrograms/d is as effective as beclomethasone dipropionate 400 micrograms/d with less effect on plasma cortisol levels.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.