[Observation on the effects of the treatment of sillicosis merger asthma]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate and Totropiumi treatment of Sillicosis merger Asthma.

METHODS

30 patients with Sillicosis merger Asthma were randomly divided into group Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate( Single group) ( n=14) and group Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate and Totropiumi (Joint group) ( n= 16), patient in single group were only given Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate (50 f.Lg Bid) inhaling,and those in Joint group were given Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate (50 f.Lg Bid) and Totropiumi ( 18 f.Lg Qd) inhaling. The treatment was last for 6 months.Before the treatment,evaluation of the two groups of Sillicosis installment,determination their foungation lung function and ACT score .. After the cause of treatment, lung function FEV10/FVC(% ), FEV10 pred%, FEV10(ml), ACT score, the incidence of side effects of two groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULT

The two groups before the treatment of lung fuction and ACT score had no statistically significant difference. The two groups after treatment of lung fuction FEV10/FVC (% ),FEV10 pred%, ACT score obviously higher than before treatment (P<0.05), Joint group in FEV1/FVC(% ), ACT score significantly higher than in Single group (?<0.05), Joint group acute attack times(0.98±0.79)/time lower than Single group (2.10 ± 0.81 )/time (t=3.86,P<0.05). There were no significant side effect in two groups.

CONCLUSION

Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate or the combination of Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate and Totropiumi can improve lung function and clinical symptoms of patients with Sillicosis merger Asthma. It is also better that the combination of Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate and Totropiumi obviously improve clinical symptoms of patients and reduice acute attack times.

Triggering effect of N-acetylglucosamine on retarded drug release from a lectin-anchored chitosan nanoparticles-in-microparticles system

The aim of this study was to investigate the use of N-acetylglucosamine (NAG) to accelerate drug release from a lectin-modified carrier. A wheat germ agglutinin (WGA)-anchored salmeterol xinafoate (SalX)-loaded nanoparticles-in-microparticles system (NiMS) was prepared with an ionotropic gelation technique combined with a spray drying method. The formulated microparticles were spherical, with diameters ranging mainly from 2 to 8 μm; the drug entrapment efficiency was >70% (w/w), and the loading capacity was approximately 8% (w/w). Drug release from WGA-SalX-NiMS, within the first 4h, was approximately 30% less than that from SalX-NiMS, indicating an effect of lectin-modification to retard drug release from the NiMS. Due to "sugar-lectin" interactions, drug release from WGA-SalX-NiMS was substantially increased after the addition of NAG to the release medium. However, no significant influence of NAG was observed on the drug release profile of SalX-NiMS without WGA anchorage. The characteristics of NAG-WGA interaction may provide valuable insights into the "triggering-effects" of specific sugars on drug release from lectin-anchored carriers. These results suggest that it is possible to control drug release from a lectin-anchored drug delivery system using a specific sugar, and that the designed novel WGA-SalX-NiMS may be a suitable formulation for chronotherapy of asthma.

Regular treatment with salmeterol and inhaled steroids for chronic asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence has suggested a link between beta2-agonists and increased asthma mortality. There has been much debate about possible causal links for this association, and whether regular (daily) long-acting beta2-agonists are safe. This is an updated systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events in trials which randomised patients with chronic asthma to regular salmeterol and inhaled corticosteroids in comparison to the same dose of inhaled corticosteroids.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised trials using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. We checked websites of clinical trial registers for unpublished trial data. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to salmeterol were also checked. The date of the most recent search is August 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel design controlled clinical trials on patients of any age and severity of asthma if they randomised patients to treatment with regular salmeterol and inhaled corticosteroids (in separate or combined inhalers), and were of at least 12 weeks duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted the review according to standard procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. We obtained unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events from the sponsors, and from FDA submissions. We assessed the quality of evidence according to GRADE recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We have included 35 studies (13,447 participants) in adults and adolescents, and 5 studies (1862 participants) in children in this review. We judged that the overall risk of bias was low, and we obtained data on serious adverse events from all studies. All except 542 adults (and none of the children) who were randomised to salmeterol were given fluticasone in the same (combination) inhaler.Seven deaths occurred in 6986 adults on regular salmeterol with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), and seven deaths in 6461 adults on regular inhaled corticosteroids at the same dose. The difference was not statistically significant (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 2.60, moderate quality evidence). The risk of dying from any cause in adults on ICS was 10 per 10,000, and on salmeterol and ICS we would expect between 3 and 26 deaths per 10,000. No deaths were reported in 1862 children, and no deaths were reported to be asthma-related in adults or children.Non-fatal serious adverse events of any cause were reported in 167 adults on regular salmeterol with ICS, compared to 135 adults on regular ICS; again this was not a statistically significant increase (Peto OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.44, moderate quality evidence). The frequency of serious adverse events was 21 per 1000 in the adults treated with ICS and 24 per 1000 in those treated with salmeterol and ICS. The absolute difference in the risk of non-fatal serious adverse events was an increase of 3 per 1000, that was not statistically significant (risk difference (RD) 0.003; 95% CI -0.002 to 0.008).There were 6 of 930 children with serious adverse events on regular salmeterol with ICS, compared to 5 out of 932 on regular ICS: there was no significant difference between treatments (Peto OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.37 to 3.91, moderate quality evidence).Asthma-related serious adverse events were reported in 29 and 23 adults in each group respectively, a non-significant difference (Peto OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.65 to 1.94, moderate quality evidence), and only 1 asthma-related event was reported in children in each treatment group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no statistically significant differences in fatal or non-fatal serious adverse events in trials in which regular salmeterol was randomly allocated with ICS, in comparison to ICS alone at the same dose. Although 13,447 adults and 1862 children have now been included in trials, the frequency of adverse events is too low and the results are too imprecise to confidently rule out a relative increase in all cause mortality or non-fatal adverse events with salmeterol used in conjunction with ICS. However, the absolute difference between groups in the risk of serious adverse events was very small. We could not determine whether the increase in all cause non-fatal serious adverse events reported in the previous meta-analysis on regular salmeterol alone is abolished by the additional use of regular ICS. We await the results of large ongoing surveillance studies mandated by the FDA to provide more information. There were no asthma-related deaths and few asthma-related serious adverse events. Clinical decisions and information for patients regarding regular use of salmeterol have to take into account the balance between known symptomatic benefits of salmeterol and the degree of uncertainty and concern associated with its potential harmful effects.

[Clinical significance of bronchial reversibility test in the treatment of childhood asthma]

OBJECTIVE

To observe changes in the lung function of asthmatic children with different symptoms during treatment, and to investigate the clinical significance of bronchial reversibility test in the treatment of asthma in children.

METHODS

A total of 417 asthmatic children were treated by salmeterol/fluticasone inhalation for more than 3 months. These patients were divided into asymptomatic, single cough, paroxysmal cough and wheeze (cough+wheeze or wheeze alone) groups based on the symptoms when they revisited the clinic. Thirty-four healthy children were used as a control group. All children underwent bronchial reversibility test using nebulized salbutamol. Lung function testing was performed before and after the test.

RESULTS

After nebulization of salbutamol, each asthma group showed significantly decreased rate of abnormal lung function and significantly increased forced expiratory volume in one second percent (FEV1%) predicted (P<0.05). Before salbutamol nebulization, the single cough, paroxysmal cough and wheeze groups had significantly higher rates of abnormal lung function and significantly lower FEV1% predicted than the control group (P<0.05). There were significant differences in the rate of abnormal lung function and FEV1% predicted among the asthma groups (P<0.05). After salbutamol nebulization, the paroxysmal cough and wheeze groups had significantly higher rates of abnormal lung function than the control group (P<0.05), but there were no significant differences between other asthma and control groups; the wheeze group had significantly lower FEV1% predicted than the control group, but no significant differences were found between other asthma and the control groups. The positive rate of bronchial reversibility test in each asthma group was significantly higher than in the control group (P<0.05). There were significant differences in the positive rate of the test between the asthma groups except between the asymptomatic and single cough groups (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Asthmatic children with different symptoms demonstrate different lung functions during treatment. Bronchial reversibility test combined with lung function test is useful in assessing asthma control and guiding treatment.

The safety of long-acting β2-agonists in the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Inhaled long-acting bronchodilators are the mainstay of pharmacotherapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Both the twice-daily long-acting β(2)-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) salmeterol and formoterol and the once-daily LABA indacaterol are indicated for use in COPD. This review examines current evidence for the safety of LABAs in COPD, focusing on their effect on exacerbations and deaths.

METHODS

We searched PubMed for placebo-controlled studies evaluating long-term (≥24 weeks) use of formoterol, salmeterol, or indacaterol in patients with stable COPD, published between January 1990 and September 2012. We summarized data relating to exacerbations and adverse events, particularly events related to COPD.

RESULTS

From 20 studies examined (8774 LABA-treated patients), there was no evidence of an association between LABA treatment and increased exacerbations, COPD-related adverse events, or deaths. Where analyzed as an efficacy outcome, LABA treatment was generally associated with significant or numerical reductions in COPD exacerbations compared with placebo. Incidences of COPD-related adverse events were similar for active and placebo treatments. The incidence of adverse events typically associated with the β(2)-agonist drug class such as skeletal muscle tremors and palpitations was low (often <1% of patients), and there were no reports of increased incidence of cardiac arrhythmias. The systemic effects of β(2)-adrenoceptor stimulation, such as high glucose and potassium levels, were considered minor.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence from clinical studies of the safety and tolerability profile of LABAs supports their long-term use in COPD.

[Cushing's syndrome during HIV treatment: pharmacological interaction during use of ritonavir]

Physicians are not always aware that locally administered glucocorticoids can cause systemic toxicity. This risk is greatly enhanced in the case of pharmacological interactions. We present two cases of HIV-infected patients who developed Cushing-like symptoms as a result of a pharmacological interaction. Their antiretroviral treatment regimen consisted of atazanavir, ritonavir, tenofovir and emtricitabine. One patient received salmeterol/fluticasone inhalations for asthmatic bronchitis. The other was treated with intra-articular triamcinolonacetonide injections for ongoing shoulder complaints. Ritonavir exhibits strong inhibition of hepatic enzyme CYP 3A4, which is part of the major metabolic pathway of most glucocorticoids. As a result of this interaction even locally administered glucocorticoids can cause symptoms of overdose, e.g. Cushing-like symptoms. Beclomethasone is a safe alternative for inhaled glucocorticoids as it is not metabolized by CYP 3A4. There is no substitute for intra-articular administration of triamcinolonacetonide. Depending on necessity of the administration of the drug, changing ritonavir-containing antiretroviral therapy to a non-interacting compound, e.g., an integrase inhibitor, is an option.

Identifying ligand binding conformations of the β2-adrenergic receptor by using its agonists as computational probes

Recently available G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) structures and biophysical studies suggest that the difference between the effects of various agonists and antagonists cannot be explained by single structures alone, but rather that the conformational ensembles of the proteins need to be considered. Here we use an elastic network model-guided molecular dynamics simulation protocol to generate an ensemble of conformers of a prototypical GPCR, β(2)-adrenergic receptor (β(2)AR). The resulting conformers are clustered into groups based on the conformations of the ligand binding site, and distinct conformers from each group are assessed for their binding to known agonists of β(2)AR. We show that the select ligands bind preferentially to different predicted conformers of β(2)AR, and identify a role of β(2)AR extracellular region as an allosteric binding site for larger drugs such as salmeterol. Thus, drugs and ligands can be used as "computational probes" to systematically identify protein conformers with likely biological significance.

Research on the molecular mechanism of Seretide treatment to asthma disease

INTRODUCTION

Asthma is one of the most common chronic diseases in children. It is attributable to complicated coactions between various genetic factors and environmental allergens.

AIM

We attempt to unfold the mechanism of asthmatic disorder and research the molecular mechanism of Seretide on asthmatic disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the GSE31773 microarray datasets downloaded from Gene Expression Omnibus database, we first screened the differentially expressed genes between healthy control and asthmatic samples cells based on classical t-test and false discovery rate < 0.05 as significant threshold. The underlying molecular mechanisms were investigated by Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathway enrichment analysis. In addition, the crosstalk network of pathways was also constructed.

RESULTS

A total of 2011 differentially expressed genes were obtained by comparing asthmatic sample treated with Seretide and healthy controls. A total of 403 differentially expressed genes were collected between asthma samples untreated by Seretide and healthy sample controls. The enriched pathway of differentially expressed genes included signal transduction disorder (such as TGF-beta signaling pathway) and metabolism disorder (such as Phenylalanine metabolism). There were 27 pathway crosstalk pairs among 13 pathways.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings will help to clarify the molecular mechanism of Seretide and offer advices for asthma pathogenesis, Seretide therapy and follow-up treatment.

Onset of bronchodilation with fluticasone/formoterol combination versus fluticasone/salmeterol in an open-label, randomized study

INTRODUCTION

The inhaled corticosteroid, fluticasone propionate (fluticasone), and the long-acting beta(2)-agonist, formoterol fumarate (formoterol), have been combined in a single aerosol inhaler (fluticasone/formoterol). In a randomized, open-label study, fluticasone/formoterol showed similar efficacy to fluticasone/salmeterol after 12 weeks of treatment. This post-hoc analysis compared the onset of bronchodilation with the two treatments.

METHODS

Adults with mild-to-moderate-severe persistent asthma were randomized to fluticasone/formoterol (100/10 or 250/10 μg twice daily [b.i.d.]) or fluticasone/salmeterol (100/50 or 250/50 μg b.i.d.) for 12 weeks. The onset of bronchodilation (the first post-dose time point at which the forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)] was ≥12% greater than the pre-dose value), responder rates (the proportion of patients achieving bronchodilation), and changes in FEV(1) were assessed at days 0 (baseline) and 84.

RESULTS

Fluticasone/formoterol (n = 101) provided more rapid onset of bronchodilation than fluticasone/salmeterol (n = 101) over the first 120 min post-dose on days 0 (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.47 [95% CI 1.05-2.05]) and 84 (HR = 1.77 [95% CI 1.14-2.73]). The odds of a patient achieving bronchodilation within 5 min of dosing were almost four-times higher with fluticasone/formoterol than with fluticasone/salmeterol on day 0 (odds ratio [OR] = 3.97 [95% CI 1.96-8.03]) and almost 10-times higher on day 84 (OR = 9.58 [95% CI 2.14-42.90]); the odds of achieving bronchodilation within 120 min post-dose were approximately twofold higher with fluticasone/formoterol on both days. The overall percentage increase in least-squares (LS) mean FEV1 during the 120-min post-dose period was significantly greater with fluticasone/formoterol than fluticasone/salmeterol on days 0 (LS mean treatment difference: 4.70% [95% CI 1.57-7.83]; P = 0.003) and 84 (2.79% [95% CI 0.65-4.93]; P = 0.011).

CONCLUSION

These analyses showed that fluticasone/formoterol provided a faster onset of bronchodilation than fluticasone/salmeterol, which was maintained over 12 weeks of treatment. This benefit may facilitate treatment adherence among patients with asthma.

Safety of regular formoterol or salmeterol in children with asthma: an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

Two large surveillance studies in adults with asthma have found an increased risk of asthma-related mortality in those who took regular salmeterol as monotherapy in comparison to placebo or regular salbutamol. No similar sized surveillance studies have been carried out in children with asthma, and we remain uncertain about the comparative safety of regular combination therapy with either formoterol or salmeterol in children with asthma.

OBJECTIVES

We have used the paediatric trial results from Cochrane systematic reviews to assess the safety of regular formoterol or salmeterol, either as monotherapy or as combination therapy, in children with asthma.

METHODS

We included Cochrane reviews relating to the safety of regular formoterol and salmeterol from a search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews conducted in May 2012, and ran updated searches for each of the reviews. These were independently assessed. All the reviews were assessed for quality using the AMSTAR tool. We extracted the data relating to children from each review and from new trials found in the updated searches (including risks of bias, study characteristics, serious adverse event outcomes, and control arm event rates).The safety of regular formoterol and salmeterol were assessed directly from the paediatric trials in the Cochrane reviews of monotherapy and combination therapy with each product. Then monotherapy was indirectly compared to combination therapy by looking at the differences between the pooled trial results for monotherapy and the pooled results for combination therapy. The comparative safety of formoterol and salmeterol was assessed using direct evidence from trials that randomised children to each treatment; this was combined with the result of an indirect comparison of the combination therapy trials, which represents the difference between the pooled results of each product when randomised against inhaled corticosteroids alone.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six high quality, up to date Cochrane reviews. Four of these related to the safety of regular formoterol or salmeterol (as monotherapy or combination therapy) and these included 19 studies in children. We added data from two recent studies on salmeterol combination therapy in 689 children which were published after the relevant Cochrane review had been completed, making a total of 21 trials on 7474 children (from four to 17 years of age). The two remaining reviews compared the safety of formoterol with salmeterol from trials randomising participants to one or other treatment, but the reviews only included a single trial in children in which there were 156 participants.Only one child died across all the trials, so impact on mortality could not be assessed.We found a statistically significant increase in the odds of suffering a non-fatal serious adverse event of any cause in children on formoterol monotherapy (Peto odds ratio (OR) 2.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 4.83, I(2) = 0%, 5 trials, N = 1335, high quality) and smaller increases in odds which were not statistically significant for salmeterol monotherapy (Peto OR 1.30; 95% CI 0.82 to 2.05, I(2) = 17%, 5 trials, N = 1333, moderate quality), formoterol combination therapy (Peto OR 1.60; 95% CI 0.80 to 3.28, I(2) = 32%, 7 trials, N = 2788, moderate quality) and salmeterol combination therapy (Peto OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.37 to 2.91, I(2) = 0%, 5 trials, N = 1862, moderate quality).We compared the pooled results of the monotherapy and combination therapy trials. There was no significant difference between the pooled ORs of children with a serious adverse event (SAE) from long-acting beta(2)-agonist beta agonist (LABA) monotherapy (Peto OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.10 to 2.33, 10 trials, N = 2668) and combination trials (Peto OR 1.50; 95% CI 0.82 to 2.75, 12 trials, N = 4,650). However, there were fewer children with an SAE in the regular inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) control group (0.7%) than in the placebo control group (3.6%). As a result, there was an absolute increase of an additional 21 children (95% CI 4 to 45) suffering such an SAE of any cause for every 1000 children treated over six months with either regular formoterol or salmeterol monotherapy, whilst for combination therapy the increased risk was an additional three children (95% CI 1 fewer to 12 more) per 1000 over three months.We only found a single trial in 156 children comparing the safety of regular salmeterol to regular formoterol monotherapy, and even with the additional evidence from indirect comparisons between the combination formoterol and salmeterol trials, the CI around the effect on SAEs is too wide to tell whether there is a difference in the comparative safety of formoterol and salmeterol (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.37 to 4.32).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We do not know if regular combination therapy with formoterol or salmeterol in children alters the risk of dying from asthma.Regular combination therapy is likely to be less risky than monotherapy in children with asthma, but we cannot say that combination therapy is risk free. There are probably an additional three children per 1000 who suffer a non-fatal serious adverse event on combination therapy in comparison to ICS over three months. This is currently our best estimate of the risk of using LABA combination therapy in children and has to be balanced against the symptomatic benefit obtained for each child. We await the results of large on-going surveillance studies to further clarify the risks of combination therapy in children and adolescents with asthma.The relative safety of formoterol in comparison to salmeterol remains unclear, even when all currently available direct and indirect trial evidence is combined.

Which long-acting bronchodilator is most cost-effective for the treatment of COPD?

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of tiotropium versus salmeterol to inform decision making within the Dutch healthcare setting.

METHODS

A previously published, validated COPD progression model was updated with new exacerbation data and adapted to the Dutch setting by including Dutch estimates of healthcare use for COPD maintenance treatment and Dutch unit costs. Exacerbation data from the POET-COPD trial were combined with evidence from earlier tiotropium studies using Bayesian meta-analysis. The model-based analysis was performed using a one- and five-year time horizon. Main health outcomes were the number of exacerbations and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

RESULTS

One-year costs per patient from the healthcare perspective were v1370 for tiotropium and v1359 for salmeterol; a difference of v11 (95% uncertainty interval (UI): -198-212). The annual number of exacerbations was 0.068 (-0.005-0.140) lower in the tiotropium group. The number of QALYs in the tiotropium group was 0.011 (-0.019-0.049) higher, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of v1015 per QALY. After five years, the difference in exacerbations, QALYs and costs between the tiotropium and salmeterol group were -0.435 (-0.915-0.107), 0.079 (-0.272-0.520) and v-277 (-1586-1074), respectively, indicating that tiotropium was more effective and less costly. Using a societal perspective, tiotropium dominated salmeterol both after one and five years.

CONCLUSION

Tiotropium reduced exacerbations and exacerbation-related costs. After one year the cost per QALY of tiotropium compared with salmeterol was very low, while after five years tiotropium was found to dominate salmeterol.

[Diagnostic and treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease based on GOLD statement 2011]

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is one of the most important diseases because of high and constantly increasing prevalence, morbidity and mortality. An update of the Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of COPD - GOLD report was published in the last days of 2011. In the paper the most important information concerning diagnosis, treatment and prevention of COPD based on GOLD statement 2011 were presented. The most interesting new information concerning diagnosis of COPD are following: post-bronchodilator ratio of FEV1/FVC < 0.7 still confirms the presence of airflow limitation in COPD; assessment of COPD symptoms is based on CAT and mMRC tests; acute bronchodilator reversibility test is no longer recommended for making COPD diagnosis; introduction of a new division of COPD patients into 4 groups (A, B, C or D) based on the level of airflow limitation, risk of exacerbations and severity of symptoms. The last change has fundamental impact on treatment guidelines, as in the past it was based only on spirometric classification, whereas currently it is guided by A-D groups selection.

Tiotropium versus long-acting beta-agonists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) are both accepted in the routine management for people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are new studies which have compared tiotropium with LABAs, including some that have evaluated recently introduced LABAs.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative clinical effects of tiotropium bromide alone versus LABA alone, upon measures of quality of life, exacerbations, lung function and serious adverse events, in people with stable COPD.To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the costs and cost-effectiveness associated with tiotropium compared to LABA in people with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and economic evaluations from searching NHS EED and HEED (date of last search February 2012). We found additional trials from web-based clinical trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and full economic evaluations if they compared effects of tiotropium alone with LABAs alone in people with COPD. We allowed co-administration of standard COPD therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, then extracted data on study quality and outcomes. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information. We analysed data using the Cochrane Review Manager(RevMan 5.1) software.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven clinical studies totalling 12,223 participants with COPD were included in the review. The studies used similar designs and were generally of good methodological quality. Inclusion criteria for RCTs were similar across the included studies, although studies varied in terms of smoking history and COPD severity of participants. They compared tiotropium (which was delivered by HandiHaler in all studies) with salmeterol (four studies, 8936 participants), formoterol (one study, 431 participants) and indacaterol (two studies, 2856 participants). All participants were instructed to discontinue anticholinergic or long-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators during treatment, but could receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at a stable dose. Study duration ranged from 3 to 12 months. We extracted data for 11,223 participants. In general, the treatment groups were well matched at baseline. Overall, the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low.In the analysis of the primary outcomes in this review, a high level of heterogeneity amongst studies meant that we did not pool data for St George's Respiratory Questionnaire quality of life score. Subgroup analyses based on the type of LABA found statistically significant differences among effects on quality of life depending on whether tiotropium was compared with salmeterol, formoterol or indacaterol. Tiotropium reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations compared with LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.93). For this outcome, there was no difference seen among the different types of LABA. There was no statistical difference in mortality observed between the treatment groups.For secondary outcomes, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the number of COPD exacerbations leading to hospitalisation compared with LABA treatment (OR 0.87; 95% 0.77 to 0.99), but not in the overall rate of all-cause hospitalisations. There was no statistically significant difference in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) or symptom score between tiotropium and LABA-treated participants. There was a lower rate of non-fatal serious adverse events recorded with tiotropium compared with LABA (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99). The tiotropium group was also associated with a lower rate of study withdrawals (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).We identified six full economic evaluations assessing the cost and cost-effectiveness of tiotropium and salmeterol. The studies were based on an economic model or empirical analysis of clinical data from RCTs. They all looked at maintenance costs and the costs for COPD exacerbations, including respiratory medications and hospitalisations. The setting for the evaluations was primary and secondary care in the UK, Greece, Netherlands, Spain and USA. All the studies estimated tiotropium to be superior to salmeterol based on better clinical outcomes (exacerbations or quality of life) and/or lower total costs. However, the authors of all evaluations reported there was substantial uncertainty around the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people with COPD, the evidence is equivocal as to whether or not tiotropium offers greater benefit than LABAs in improving quality of life; however, this is complicated by differences in effect among the LABA types. Tiotropium was more effective than LABAs as a group in preventing COPD exacerbations and disease-related hospitalisations, although there were no statistical differences between groups in overall hospitalisation rates or mortality during the study periods. There were fewer serious adverse events and study withdrawals recorded with tiotropium compared with LABAs. Symptom improvement and changes in lung function were similar between the treatment groups. Given the small number of studies to date, with high levels of heterogeneity among them, one approach may be to give a COPD patient a substantial trial of tiotropium, followed by a LABA (or vice versa), then to continue prescribing the long-acting bronchodilator that the patient prefers. Further studies are needed to compare tiotropium with different LABAs, which are currently ongoing. The available economic evidence indicates that tiotropium may be cost-effective compared with salmeterol in several specific settings, but there is considerable uncertainty around this finding.

Combined corticosteroid and long-acting beta(2)-agonist in one inhaler versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Both inhaled steroids (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) are used in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This updated review compared compound LABA plus ICS therapy (LABA/ICS) with the LABA component drug given alone.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of ICS and LABA in a single inhaler with mono-component LABA alone in adults with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. The date of the most recent search was November 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, double-blind controlled trials. We included trials comparing compound ICS and LABA preparations with their component LABA preparations in people with COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcomes were exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia, while secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (measured by validated scales), lung function, withdrawals due to lack of efficacy, withdrawals due to adverse events and side-effects. Dichotomous data were analysed as random-effects model odds ratios or rate ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and continuous data as mean differences and 95% CIs. We rated the quality of evidence for exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia according to recommendations made by the GRADE working group.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies met the inclusion criteria, randomising 11,794 people with severe COPD. We looked at any LABA plus ICS inhaler (LABA/ICS) versus the same LABA component alone, and then we looked at the 10 studies which assessed fluticasone plus salmeterol (FPS) and the four studies assessing budesonide plus formoterol (BDF) separately. The studies were well-designed with low risk of bias for randomisation and blinding but they had high rates of attrition, which reduced our confidence in the results for outcomes other than mortality.Primary outcomes There was low quality evidence that exacerbation rates in people using LABA/ICS inhalers were lower in comparison to those with LABA alone, from nine studies which randomised 9921 participants (rate ratio 0.76; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.84). This corresponds to one exacerbation per person per year on LABA and 0.76 exacerbations per person per year on ICS/LABA. Our confidence in this effect was limited by statistical heterogeneity between the results of the studies (I(2) = 68%) and a risk of bias from the high withdrawal rates across the studies. When analysed as the number of people experiencing one or more exacerbations over the course of the study, FPS lowered the odds of an exacerbation with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.83 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.98, 6 studies, 3357 participants). With a risk of an exacerbation of 47% in the LABA group over one year, 42% of people treated with LABA/ICS would be expected to experience an exacerbation. Concerns over the effect of reporting biases led us to downgrade the quality of evidence for this effect from high to moderate.There was no significant difference in the rate of hospitalisations (rate ratio 0.79; 95% CI 0.55 to 1.13, very low quality evidence due to risk of bias, statistical imprecision and inconsistency). There was no significant difference in mortality between people on combined inhalers and those on LABA, from 10 studies on 10,680 participants (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.11, downgraded to moderate quality evidence due to statistical imprecision). Pneumonia occurred more commonly in people randomised to combined inhalers, from 12 studies with 11,076 participants (OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.20 to 2.01, moderate quality evidence due to risk of bias in relation to attrition) with an annual risk of around 3% on LABA alone compared to 4% on combination treatment. There were no significant differences between the results for either exacerbations or pneumonia from trials adding different doses or types of inhaled corticosteroid.Secondary outcomes ICS/LABA was more effective than LABA alone in improving health-related quality of life measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (1.58 units lower with FPS; 2.69 units lower with BDF), dyspnoea (0.09 units lower with FPS), symptoms (0.07 units lower with BDF), rescue medication (0.38 puffs per day fewer with FPS, 0.33 puffs per day fewer with BDF), and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) (70 mL higher with FPS, 50 mL higher with BDF). Candidiasis (OR 3.75) and upper respiratory infection (OR 1.32) occurred more frequently with FPS than SAL. We did not combine adverse event data relating to candidiasis for BDF studies as the results were very inconsistent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Concerns over the analysis and availability of data from the studies bring into question the superiority of ICS/LABA over LABA alone in preventing exacerbations. The effects on hospitalisations were inconsistent and require further exploration. There was moderate quality evidence of an increased risk of pneumonia with ICS/LABA. There was moderate quality evidence that treatments had similar effects on mortality. Quality of life, symptoms score, rescue medication use and FEV(1) improved more on ICS/LABA than on LABA, but the average differences were probably not clinically significant for these outcomes. To an individual patient the increased risk of pneumonia needs to be balanced against the possible reduction in exacerbations.More information would be useful on the relative benefits and adverse event rates with combination inhalers using different doses of inhaled corticosteroids. Evidence from head-to-head comparisons is needed to assess the comparative risks and benefits of the different combination inhalers.

Impact of Inhaled Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate Combination Product versus Budesonide on the Health-Related Quality of Life of Patients with Asthma

OBJECTIVE AND DESIGN

Measurement of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) may show benefits of asthma treatments not revealed by objective monitoring and can complement clinical and physiological assessments of treatment outcome. HR-QOL was measured in four countries in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized comparison of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination and budesonide in patients aged > or =12 years with moderate-to-severe asthma uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids.

METHODS

Patients received, twice daily, either salmeterol/fluticasone propionate 50/250 microg (Seretide/ Advair) via Diskus inhaler (n = 55) or budesonide 800 microg (Pulmicort) via Turbuhaler (n = 58). Patients completed the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) at baseline and after 12 weeks treatment (or early withdrawal). The analysis included 113 patients.

RESULTS

Mean improvement in AQLQ scores achieved clinical importance in all four domains in the salmeterol/fluticasone group (AQLQ change > or =0.5), but in only two domains in the budesonide group. Although the mean overall improvement in AQLQ scores observed in the salmeterol/fluticasone group was significantly greater than that observed in the budesonide group (difference of 0.45; p = 0.002), the difference was less than the minimal important difference (0.5). Nevertheless, further analysis showed that the number-needed-to-treat was only 3.4. This indicates that only 3.4 patients need to be treated with the salmeterol/fluticasone combination for one patient to experience a meaningful improvement in HR-QOL, relative to monotherapy with an increased dose of budesonide.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate resulted in superior gains in HR-QOL relative to increasing the dose of inhaled corticosteroids.

Inhaled Salmeterol/Fluticasone Propionate Combination in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate is a fixed-dose combination of the long-acting beta2-adrenoceptor agonist salmeterol and the corticosteroid fluticasone propionate and is inhaled via the Diskus powder inhaler. In three randomized, double-blind, 24-week or 52-week studies in >2850 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), administration of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate 50/250 microg twice daily (in one study) and salmeterol/fluticasone propionate 50/500 microg twice daily (in the other studies) provided greater improvement in lung function than placebo or either component alone at the same nominal dosage. Both strengths of the combination product administered twice daily resulted in clinically meaningful increases in scores in health-related quality-of-life questionnaires that were specific for respiratory disease. Improvements in this and almost all other secondary measures of efficacy, including symptomatic outcomes, were significantly greater with the combination product than with placebo. Administration of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate as a combination product did not result in any untoward interactions that affected the pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic or tolerability profiles of the individual components. Candidiasis, hoarseness/dysphonia, throat irritation and headache occurred more frequently with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate than with placebo in patients with COPD.

[Comparative study on effect of acupoint heat-sensitive moxibustion and Seretide on the symptoms of bronchial asthma at chronic persistent stage]

OBJECTIVE

To observe the difference in the efficacy on the symptoms of bronchial asthma at the chronic persistent stage between acupoint heat-sensitive moxibustion and western medicine with Seretide.

METHODS

Sixty-four cases were randomly divided into a heat-sensitive moxibustion group (32 cases) and a western medication group (32 cases). In the heat-sensitive moxibustion group, the sensitized points located between Feishu (BL 13) and Geshu (BL 17) or in the region 6-cun lateral from the 1st and the 2nd intercostal spaces of the chest were selected. The heat-sensitive moxibustion was adopted, continuously for 8 days, once per day. In the later 22 days of the 1st month, 12 treatments should be ensured. Two months later, 15 treatments should be guaranteed each month. The time of each treatment was 30 to 90 min. Totally 50 treatments were required. In the western medication group, Seretide inhaler was adopted, one inhalation each time, twice per day, for 3 months totally. The asthmatic symptoms were scored for the patients in two groups and the comparison was made between the two groups.

RESULTS

After 3 months of treatment, the asthmatic symptom scores were all improved for the patients in the heat-sensitive moxibustion group and the western medication group as compared with those before treatment (both P < 0.05). In 6 months of follow-up visit, the asthmatic symptom scores in the heat-sensitive moxibustion group were stable, but those in the western medication group were reduced, there was significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The acupoint heat-sensitive moxibustion effectively relieves the clinical symptoms for the patients with bronchial asthma at the chronic persistent stage. Its efficacy is similar to that of Seretide inhaler. But the long-term efficacy of the heat-sensitive moxibustion is much better.

Effect of combination treatment on lung volumes and exercise endurance time in COPD

BACKGROUND

Data comparing two bronchodilators vs. one bronchodilator plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) on hyperinflation and exercise endurance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are scarce, though these therapeutic strategies are widely used in clinical practice.

METHODS

We performed a randomized, crossover clinical trial of two × 8 weeks comparing tiotropium (18 μg once daily) + salmeterol (50 μg twice daily) (T + S) to salmeterol + fluticasone (50/500 μg twice daily) (S + F) in COPD (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) ≤65% predicted, and thoracic gas volume (TGV) ≥120% predicted). Coprimary endpoints were postbronchodilator TGV and exercise endurance time (EET).

RESULTS

In 309 patients, at baseline, prebronchodilator FEV(1) was 1.36 L (46% predicted), TGV was 5.42 L (165% predicted), and EET = 458 s. Relative to S + F, T + S lowered postdose TGV by 182 ± 44 ml after 4 weeks (p < 0.0001) and 87 ± 44 ml after 8 weeks (p < 0.05). EET was nonsignificantly increased following T + S treatment (20 ± 15 s at 4 weeks, 15 ± 13 s at 8 weeks) vs. S + F. BORG dyspnea score at exercise isotime was reduced in favor of T + S.

CONCLUSION

The two bronchodilators decreased hyperinflation significantly more than one bronchodilator and ICS. This difference was not reflected in EET. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530842).

Efficacy of once-daily indacaterol 75 μg relative to alternative bronchodilators in COPD: a study level and a patient level network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the comparative efficacy of indacaterol 75 μg once daily (OD), tiotropium 18 μg OD, salmeterol 50 μg twice daily (BID), formoterol 12 μg BID, and placebo for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) based on individual patient data (IPD) from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the indacaterol trial program and aggregate data (AD) identified from a systematic review of RCTs.

METHODS

22 RCTs were included in the AD analysis that evaluated: indacaterol 75 μg (n = 2 studies), indacaterol 150 μg n = 5 (i.e. salmeterol 50 μg) (n = 5), indacaterol 300 μg (n = 2), tiotropium 18 μg (n = 10), salmeterol 50 μg (n = 7), and formoterol 12 μg (n = 4). All of the studies except for one head-to-head comparison (tiotropium vs. salmeterol) were placebo controlled. Outcomes of interest were trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at week 12. The AD from all trials was analysed simultaneously using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) and relative treatment effects between all regimens were obtained. In a separate analysis, the IPD available from the 6 indacaterol RCTs was analysed in a NMA. Treatment-by-covariate interactions were included in both analyses to improve similarity of the trials.

RESULTS

All interventions compared were more efficacious than placebo regarding FEV1 at 12 weeks. Indacaterol 75 μg is expected to result in a comparable FEV1 at 12 weeks to tiotropium and salmeterol based on both IPD and AD analyses. In comparison to formoterol, the IPD and AD results indicate indacaterol 75 μg is more efficacious (IPD = 0.07 L difference; 95%Credible Interval (CrI) 0.02 to 0.11; AD = 0.05 L difference; 95%CrI 0.01; 0.09). In terms of SGRQ total score at 12 weeks, indacaterol 75 μg and formoterol were more efficacious than placebo, whereas for tiotropium and salmeterol the credible intervals included zero for the AD results only (tiotropium: -2.99 points improvement versus placebo; 95%CrI -6.48 to 0.43; salmeterol:-2.52; 95%CrI: -5.34; 0.44). Both IPD and AD results suggest that indacaterol 75 μg is expected to be comparable to all active treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a synthesis of currently available AD RCT evidence as well as an IPD network meta-analysis of six RCTs, indacaterol 75 μg is expected to be at least as efficacious as formoterol and comparable to tiotropium and salmeterol regarding FEV1. Furthermore, indacaterol 75 μg shows comparable level of improvement in health-related quality of life to tiotropium, salmeterol, and formoterol, as measured by the SGRQ.

Effect of switching from salmeterol/fluticasone to formoterol/ budesonide combinations in patients with uncontrolled asthma

BACKGROUND

Combination therapy with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a long-acting β(2)-agonist (LABA) in a single inhaler is the mainstay of asthma management and salmeterol/fluticasone combination (SFC) and fixed-dose formoterol/budesonide combination (FBC) are currently available in Japan; however, there is nothing to choose between the two. The purpose of this study was to clarify the effect of switching from SFC to FBC in patients with asthma not adequately controlled under the former treatment regimen.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, uncontrolled longitudinal study in 87 adult patients with an Asthma Control Questionnaire, 5-item version (ACQ5) score of greater than 0.75 under treatment with SFC 50/250μg one inhalation twice daily (bid). SFC was switched to FBC 4.5/160μg two inhalations bid. Study outcomes included ACQ5 score, peak expiratory flow (PEF), FEV(1), and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) at the end of treatment period.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients completed the study. ACQ5 scores improved and exceeded the clinically meaningful difference after 12 weeks of treatment and well-controlled asthma (ACQ5 score ≤0.75) was attained in 37 (44.6%) patients. Minimum and maximum PEF and FEV(1) values improved significantly, but not FeNO values, after switching from SFC to FBC.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching ICS/LABA combination therapy is a useful option in the management of asthma that is not optimally controlled.

Salmeterol and fluticasone in young children with multiple-trigger wheeze

BACKGROUND

Treatment guidelines recommend using an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) plus a long-acting β(2)-agonist (LABA) for childhood asthma when the symptoms are not controlled by ICS alone, but the appropriate use of LABAs in children continues to be debated.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of an inhaled salmeterol and fluticasone propionate combination, 50/100 μg twice daily, with fluticasone propionate, 100 μg twice daily, or salmeterol, 50 μg twice daily, in children with multiple-trigger wheeze.

METHODS

A total of 105 children 4 to 7 years of age with multiple-trigger wheezing based on respiratory symptoms and bronchodilator responsiveness and/or exercise-induced bronchoconstriction without a viral cold were randomized to salmeterol-fluticasone, fluticasone propionate alone, or salmeterol alone via a metered-dose inhaler and a spacer device for 8 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was exhaled nitric oxide level. Secondary outcomes were lung function measurements via impulse oscillometry, respiratory symptoms, and rescue medication use.

RESULTS

The exhaled nitric oxide levels decreased after all treatments, significantly more so after salmeterol-fluticasone and fluticasone than with salmeterol (adjusted geometric means at 8 weeks: salmeterol-fluticasone, 9.4 ppb; fluticasone, 9.3 ppb; salmeterol, 13.9 ppb; salmeterol-fluticasone vs salmeterol, P = .02; fluticasone vs salmeterol, P = .01). No treatment differences were found with respect to respiratory symptoms or median rescue use. Salmeterol-fluticasone resulted in a small but statistically significant improvement in baseline lung function compared with fluticasone. All treatments were equally well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The effects of salmeterol-fluticasone and fluticasone were comparable, although lung function improvement was better with salmeterol-fluticasone than with fluticasone alone. There is no obvious benefit in initiation therapy with salmeterol-fluticasone rather than fluticasone alone in the treatment of steroid-naive children with multiple-trigger wheeze.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Pathway of clinical trial registry of Helsinki University:http://www.hus.fi/?Path=1;28;2530;9899;9900;23618;23903;33578.

Observational study of the outcomes and costs of initiating maintenance therapies in patients with moderate exacerbations of COPD

BACKGROUND

There are limited data describing patients with moderate COPD exacerbations and evaluating comparative effectiveness of maintenance treatments in this patient population. The study examined COPD patients with moderate COPD exacerbations. COPD-related outcomes were compared between patients initiating fluticasone propionate-salmeterol 250/50 mcg (FSC) vs anticholinergics (ACs) following a moderate COPD exacerbation.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study used a large administrative claims database (study period: 2003-2009) to identify and describe patients with an initial, moderate COPD exacerbation. A descriptive analysis of patients with moderate COPD exacerbations was done evaluating maintenance treatment rates, subsequent COPD exacerbation rates, and COPD-related costs during a 1-year period. A cohort analysis compared COPD exacerbation rates and associated costs during a variable-length follow-up period between patients initiating maintenance therapy with FSC or ACs. COPD exacerbations were reported as rate per 100 patient-years, and monthly costs were reported (standardized to USD 2009). COPD exacerbation rates between cohorts were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models, and costs were analyzed using generalized linear models with log-link and gamma distribution.

RESULTS

21,524 patients with a moderate COPD exacerbation were identified. Only 25% initiated maintenance therapy, and 13% had a subsequent exacerbation. Annual costs averaged $594 per patient. A total of 2,849 treated patients (FSC = 925; AC = 1,924) were eligible for the cohort analysis. The FSC cohort had a significantly lower rate of COPD exacerbations compared to the AC cohort (20.8 vs 32.8; P = 0.04). After adjusting for differences in baseline covariates, the FSC cohort had a 42% significantly lower risk of a COPD exacerbation (HR = 0.58; 95% CI: 0.38, 0.91). The FSC cohort incurred significantly higher adjusted pharmacy costs per patient per month by $37 (95% CI: $19, $72) for COPD-related medications vs the AC cohort. However, this increase was offset by a significant reduction in adjusted monthly medical costs per patient for the FSC vs the AC cohort ($82 vs $112; P < 0.05). Total monthly COPD-related costs, as a result, did not differ between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Only a quarter of patients with a moderate COPD exacerbation were subsequently treated with maintenance therapy. Initiation of FSC among those treated was associated with better clinical and economic outcomes compared to AC.

Characteristics of AZD9708, a novel, selective β2-adrenoceptor agonist with rapid onset and long duration of action

Here we describe the pre-clinical pharmacological profile of AZD9708, a novel long-acting β(2)-adrenoceptor agonist that has potential as a once-daily therapy for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). AZD9708 is a potent and selective agonist at the human β(2)-adrenoceptor, with selectivity over human β(1)- and β(3)-adrenoceptors of >500 and >24 fold, respectively. AZD9708 relaxes carbachol-induced contraction of human bronchial rings with a time to 90% of maximal relaxation of 13-20 min, similar to that seen with formoterol and quicker than salmeterol. In anesthetized guinea pigs, AZD9708 provides significant protection against histamine-induced airway constriction at 24 h after intratracheal and nebulized doses. This is longer than with intratracheal salmeterol, which is bronchoprotective for approximately 8 h, and formoterol, which is bronchoprotective for 8 and 12 h following nebulized and intratracheal dosing, respectively. AZD9708 also shows the potential for a greater therapeutic margin than widely used β(2)-adrenoceptor agonists such as formoterol. At a defined efficacy dose that provides 80% bronchoprotection (ED(80)), formoterol leads to a decrease in blood potassium levels in guinea pigs, whilst AZD9708 is not associated with significant reductions in potassium levels at doses up to 7 times the ED(80). [(14)C]AZD9708 is associated with extensive protein binding in both human (mean 1.0% free) and rat (mean 2.6% free) plasma. This pharmacological profile indicates the potential of AZD9708 to become an important addition to the range of bronchodilators available for the treatment of patients with obstructive airways disease.

Long-acting beta(2)-agonist in addition to tiotropium versus either tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting bronchodilators comprising long-acting beta(2)-agonists and the anticholinergic agent tiotropium are commonly used for managing persistent symptoms of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Combining these treatments, which have different mechanisms of action, may be more effective than the individual components. However, the benefits and risks of combining tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary (COPD) disease are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects of treatment with tiotropium in addition to long-acting beta(2)-agonist compared to tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and clinicaltrials.gov up to January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel group, randomised controlled trials of three months or longer comparing treatment with tiotropium in addition to long-acting beta(2)-agonist against tiotropium or long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality and the outcome results. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected information on adverse effects from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Five trials were included in this review, mostly recruiting participants with moderate or severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. All of them compared tiotropium in addition to long-acting beta(2)-agonist to tiotropium alone, but only one trial additionally compared a combination of the two types of bronchodilator with long-acting beta(2)-agonist (formoterol) alone. Two studies used the long-acting beta(2)-agonist indacaterol, two used formoterol and one used salmeterol.Compared to tiotropium alone (3263 patients), treatment with tiotropium plus long-acting beta(2)-agonist resulted in a slightly larger improvement in the mean health-related quality of life (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) MD -1.61; 95% CI -2.93 to -0.29). In the control arm, tiotropium alone, the SGRQ improved by falling 4.5 units from baseline and with both treatments the improvement was a fall of 6.1 units from baseline (on average). High withdrawal rates in the trials increased the uncertainty in this result, and the GRADE assessment for this outcome was therefore moderate. There were no significant differences in the other primary outcomes (hospital admission or mortality).The secondary outcome of pre-bronchodilator FEV(1) showed a small mean increase with the addition of long-acting beta(2)-agonist (MD 0.07 L; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.09) over the control arm, which showed a change from baseline ranging from 0.03 L to 0.13 L on tiotropium alone. None of the other secondary outcomes (exacerbations, symptom scores, serious adverse events, and withdrawals) showed any statistically significant differences between the groups. There were wide confidence intervals around these outcomes and moderate heterogeneity for both exacerbations and withdrawals.The results from the one trial comparing the combination of tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonist to long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone (417 participants) were insufficient to draw firm conclusions for this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results from this review indicate a small mean improvement in health-related quality of life for patients on a combination of tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonist compared to tiotropium alone, but it is not clear how clinically important this mean difference may be. Hospital admission and mortality have not been shown to be altered by adding long-acting beta(2)-agonists to tiotropium. There were not enough data to determine the relative efficacy and safety of tiotropium plus long-acting beta(2)-agonist compared to long-acting beta(2)-agonist alone. There were insufficient data to make comparisons between the different long-acting beta(2)-agonists when used in addition to tiotropium.

Characterization of respiratory deposition of fluticasone-salmeterol hydrofluoroalkane-134a and hydrofluoroalkane-134a beclomethasone in asthmatic patients

BACKGROUND

Fixed combination fluticasone-salmeterol is the most used anti-inflammatory asthma treatment in North America, yet no studies report the actual respiratory tract dose or the distribution of drug within the lungs. Inflammation due to asthma affects all airways of the lungs, both large and small. Inhaled steroid delivery to airways results from a range of drug particle sizes, with emphasis on smaller drug particles capable of reaching the peripheral airways. Previous studies suggested that smaller drug particles increase pulmonary deposition and decrease oropharyngeal deposition.

OBJECTIVES

To characterize the dose of fluticasone-salmeterol hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA) (particle size, 2.7 μm) delivered to asthmatic patients and examine the drug distribution within the lungs. The results were compared with the inhalation delivery of HFA beclomethasone (particle size, 0.7 μm).

METHODS

A crossover study was conducted in asthmatic patients with commercial formulations of fluticasone-salmeterol and HFA beclomethasone radiolabeled with technetium Tc 99m. Deposition was measured using single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography gamma scintigraphy.

RESULTS

Two-dimensional planar image analysis indicated that 58% of the HFA beclomethasone and 16% of the fluticasone-salmeterol HFA were deposited in the patient's lungs. The oropharyngeal cavity and gut analyses indicated that 77% of the fluticasone-salmeterol HFA was deposited in the oropharynx compared with 35% of the HFA beclomethasone.

CONCLUSIONS

The decreased peripheral airway deposition and increased oropharyngeal deposition of fluticasone-salmeterol HFA was a result of its larger particle size. The smaller particle size of HFA beclomethasone allowed a greater proportion of lung deposition with a concomitant decrease in oropharyngeal deposition.

Regular treatment with formoterol versus regular treatment with salmeterol for chronic asthma: serious adverse events

BACKGROUND

An increase in serious adverse events with both regular formoterol and regular salmeterol in chronic asthma has been demonstrated in previous Cochrane reviews.

OBJECTIVES

We set out to compare the risks of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events in trials which have randomised patients with chronic asthma to regular formoterol versus regular salmeterol.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials using the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. We checked manufacturers' websites of clinical trial registers for unpublished trial data and also checked Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to formoterol and salmeterol. The date of the most recent search was January 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included controlled, parallel-design clinical trials on patients of any age and with any severity of asthma if they randomised patients to treatment with regular formoterol versus regular salmeterol (without randomised inhaled corticosteroids), and were of at least 12 weeks' duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected trials for inclusion in the review and extracted outcome data. We sought unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events from the sponsors and authors.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included four studies (involving 1116 adults and 156 children). All studies were open label and recruited patients who were already taking inhaled corticosteroids for their asthma, and all studies contributed data on serious adverse events. All studies compared formoterol 12 μg versus salmeterol 50 μg twice daily. The adult studies were all comparing Foradil Aerolizer with Serevent Diskus, and the children's study compared Oxis Turbohaler to Serevent Accuhaler. There was only one death in an adult (which was unrelated to asthma) and none in children, and there were no significant differences in non-fatal serious adverse events comparing formoterol to salmeterol in adults (Peto odds ratio (OR) 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 1.28), or children (Peto OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.06 to 15.33). Over a six-month period, in studies involving adults that contributed to this analysis, the percentages with serious adverse events were 5.1% for formoterol and 6.4% for salmeterol; and over a three-month period the percentages of children with serious adverse events were 1.3% for formoterol and 1.3% for salmeterol.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We identified four studies comparing regular formoterol to regular salmeterol (without randomised inhaled corticosteroids, but all participants were on regular background inhaled corticosteroids). The events were infrequent and consequently too few patients have been studied to allow any firm conclusions to be drawn about the relative safety of formoterol and salmeterol. Asthma-related serious adverse events were rare and there were no reported asthma-related deaths.

Airways hyperresponsiveness to different inhaled combination therapies in adolescent asthmatics

BACKGROUND

Inhaled combined therapy improves the pulmonary function in asthmatic patients. The effect on the airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and the efficacy of different pharmacological schedules is not well clarified on adolescent asthmatics.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the responses to different combined inhaled therapies in adolescent asthmatics and study its impact on exercise induced AHR.

METHODS

Basal lung function tests (LFT) were performed in 30 adolescents (13 to 16 years old; 19 female) with allergic asthma. They were submitted to exercise challenge test (EC) followed by bronchodilator test (BD). During 4 weeks, 15 adolescents were submitted to inhaled fluticasone/salmeterol (group A) and other 15 to inhaled budesonide/formoterol (group B). After this period, they underwent another functional evaluation as previous.

RESULTS

Before treatment, pulmonary function was similar in both groups. After 4 weeks of treatment, these groups showed an improvement of the basal LFT (p = 0.001 for FEV1 in both), decrease on bronchoconstriction induced by exercise (NS for both) and less recovery on BD response (p = 0.001 and 0.002, for FEV1 respectively groups A and B). Group B showed a better performance, with higher improvement of basal FEF 25/75 (p = 0.001), reduced bronchoconstriction response to EC (p = 0.008 for FEV1) and fewer response to BD test (p < 0.0001 for FEV1 and 0.024 for FEF 25/75) No adverse events were observed.

CONCLUSION

After 4 weeks of inhaled combined therapy, these patients improved their pulmonary function and bronchomotricity. Those under budesonide/formoterol showed the highest improvement. These medications are a safe measure in controlling the asthma in these patients.

Single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) for asthma

Around 5.2 million people in the UK are estimated to have asthma.1 Mortality and hospitalisation rates associated with the condition fell significantly in the last 20 years of the 20th century, but have not fallen further since then.2 In 2006, there were over 1,000 asthma deaths and around 78,000 hospital admissions due to asthma in the UK.2 One pharmacological strategy that has been developed recently to try to improve asthma management is the use of single maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART). This involves the patient using a single inhaler containing a corticosteroid (budesonide) and a long-acting beta(2) agonist (LABA; formoterol), for regular maintenance treatment, but also for additional 'rescue' use on an as-needed basis. Combination inhaler use is claimed to improve adherence, and is now included in UK asthma guidelines.3 Here we assess the evidence for single combination therapy, its relative effectiveness in comparison with other approaches, and whether or under what circumstances it should be used.

Cell-based and in-silico studies on the high intrinsic activity of two boron-containing salbutamol derivatives at the human β₂-adrenoceptor

Salbutamol is a well-known β(2) adrenoceptor (β(2)AR) partial agonist. We synthesized two boron-containing salbutamol derivatives (BCSDs) with greater potency and efficacy, compared to salbutamol, for inducing β(2)AR-mediated smooth-muscle relaxation in guinea-pig tracheal rings. However, the mechanism involved in this pharmacological effect remains unclear. In order to gain insight, we carried out binding and functional assays for BCSDs in HEK-293T cells transfected with the human β(2)AR (hβ(2)AR). The transfected hβ(2)AR showed similar affinity for BCSDs and salbutamol, but adenosine 3',5'-cyclic phosphate (cAMP) accumulation induced by both BCSDs was similar to that elicited by isoproterenol and greater than that induced by salbutamol. The boron-containing precursors (boric and phenylboronic acids, 100 μM) had no significant effect on salbutamol binding or salbutamol-induced cAMP accumulation. These experimental results are in agreement with theoretical docking simulations on lipid bilayer membrane-embedded hβ(2)AR structures. These receptors showed slightly higher affinity for BCSDs than for salbutamol. An essential change between putative active and inactive conformational states depended on the interaction of the tested ligands with the fifth, sixth and seventh transmembrane domains. Overall, these data suggest that BCSDs induce and stabilize conformational states of the hβ(2)AR that are highly capable of stimulating cAMP production.

Fluticasone propionate and Salmeterol combination induces SOCS-3 expression in airway epithelial cells

Fluticasone propionate (FP) and Salmeterol (SAL) are commonly used in combination therapy for patients with Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Clinical studies show that FP/SAL used in combination therapy was found to inhibit airway inflammation in COPD patients. However, the mechanisms associated with FP/SAL induced anti-inflammatory effects were not clear. We have evaluated the effect of FP/SAL and tobacco smoke (TS) on SOCS-3 and interleukine-6 expression in bronchial airway epithelial cells (BAEpCs). Human BAEpCs were exposed to TS and subsequently treated with FP or SAL alone or in combinations in the presence and absence of mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitors for either Erk1/Erk2, or p38 or PI3 kinase. In BAEpCs, TS induced IL-6 expression via ERK1/ERK2 MAPK pathway and FP/SAL inhibited TS mediated IL-6 expression. TS down regulated the SOCS-3 expression via activation of Erk1/Erk2, and p38 MAPK signaling. When TS exposed BAEpCs were treated with FP/SAL SOCS-3 expression was restored. FP/SAL combinations induced significantly higher expression of SOCS-3 in BAEpCs when compared to individual drug. Pretreatment with Ly294002 a PI3 MAPK inhibitor significantly attenuated FP/SAL induced SOCS-3 expression in BAEpCs. Furthermore, FP/SAL blunted TS induced phosphorylation of Erk1/Erk2 and p38 MAPK in BAEpCs. Our study suggests that TS inhibits SOCS-3, combination of FP/SAL has a profound synergistic effect on SOCS-3 induction in BAEpCs and it is dependent on PI3 kinase signaling pathway. SOCS-3 may represent a potential biomarker for understanding the efficacy and a novel anti-inflammatory mechanism of FP/SAL combination therapy in the treatment of COPD.

Inhaled corticosteroids versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids can be used as maintenance therapy by patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These interventions are often taken together in a combination inhaler. However, the relative added value of the two individual components is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effects of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) compared to long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) on clinical outcomes in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (latest search August 2011) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists in the treatment of patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality, study outcomes and adverse events. We also contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven randomised trials (5997 participants) of good quality with a duration of six months to three years. All of the trials compared ICS/LABA combination inhalers with LABA and ICS as individual components. Four of these trials included fluticasone and salmeterol monocomponents and the remaining three included budesonide and formoterol monocomponents. There was no statistically significant difference in our primary outcome, the number of patients experiencing exacerbations (odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.67), or the rate of exacerbations per patient year (rate ratio (RR) 0.96; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.02) between inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists. The incidence of pneumonia, our co-primary outcome, was significantly higher among patients on inhaled corticosteroids than on long-acting beta(2)-agonists whether classified as an adverse event (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.73) or serious adverse event (Peto OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.93). Results of the secondary outcomes analysis were as follows. Mortality was higher in patients on inhaled corticosteroids compared to patients on long-acting beta(2)-agonists (Peto OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.42), although the difference was not statistically significant. Patients treated with beta(2)-agonists showed greater improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV(1) compared to those treated with inhaled corticosteroids (mean difference (MD) 18.99 mL; 95% CI 0.52 to 37.46), whilst greater improvements in health-related quality of life were observed in patients receiving inhaled corticosteroids compared to those receiving long-acting beta(2)-agonists (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) MD -0.74; 95% CI -1.42 to -0.06). In both cases the differences were statistically significant but rather small in magnitude. There were no statistically significant differences between ICS and LABA in the number of hospitalisations due to exacerbations, number of mild exacerbations, peak expiratory flow, dyspnoea, symptoms scores, use of rescue medication, adverse events, all cause hospitalisations, or withdrawals from studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Placebo-controlled trials have established the benefits of both long-acting beta-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid therapy for COPD patients as individual therapies. This review, which included trials allowing comparisons between LABA and ICS, has shown that the two therapies confer similar benefits across the majority of outcomes, including the frequency of exacerbations and mortality. Use of long-acting beta-agonists appears to confer a small additional benefit in terms of improvements in lung function compared to inhaled corticosteroids. On the other hand, inhaled corticosteroid therapy shows a small advantage over long-acting beta-agonist therapy in terms of health-related quality of life, but inhaled corticosteroids also increase the risk of pneumonia. This review supports current guidelines advocating long-acting beta-agonists as frontline therapy for COPD, with regular inhaled corticosteroid therapy as an adjunct in patients experiencing frequent exacerbations.

Combination fluticasone and salmeterol versus fixed dose combination budesonide and formoterol for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta-agonists are a common second line treatment in people with asthma inadequately controlled with inhaled corticosteroids. Single device inhalers combine a long-acting beta-agonist with an inhaled steroid delivering both drugs as a maintenance treatment regimen. This updated review compares two fixed-dose options, fluticasone/salmeterol FP/SALand budesonide/formoterol, since this comparison represents a common therapeutic choice.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects of fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol in people with asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials with prespecified terms. We performed additional hand searching of manufacturers' web sites and online trial registries. Search results are current to June 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised studies comparing fixed dose fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol in adults or children with a diagnosis of asthma. Treatment in the studies had to last for a minimum of 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review. We combined continuous data outcomes with a mean difference (MD), and dichotomous data outcomes with an odds ratio (OR). We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies met the review entry criteria (5537 adults). Study populations entered the studies having previously been treated with inhaled steroids and had moderate or mild airway obstruction (mean FEV(1) predicted between 65% and 84% at baseline). Most of the studies assessed treatment over a period of six months. The studies were at a low risk of selection and performance/detection bias, although we could not determine whether missing data had an impact on the results. Availablility of outcome data was satisfactory.Primary outcomesThe odds ratio for exacerbations requiring oral steroids was lower with fluticasone/salmeterol but did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.07, four studies, N = 4949). With an assumed risk with budesonide/formoterol of 106/1000 participants requiring oral steroids, treatment with fluticasone/salmeterol would lead to between 25 fewer and seven more people per 1000 experiencing a course of oral steroids. Although the odds of hospital admission was higher with fluticasone/salmeterol, this did not reach statistical significance (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.47, four studies, 4879 participants). With an assumed risk in the budesonide/formoterol of 7/1000, between two fewer and 10 more people per 1000 would be hospitalised on fluticasone/salmeterol. The odds of a serious adverse event related to asthma was higher with fluticasone/salmeterol but did not differ significantly between treatments (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.86, three studies, 4054 participants). With an assumed risk in the budesonide/formoterol of 7/1000, between two fewer and 13 more people per 1000 would experience a serious adverse event on fluticasone/salmeterol.Secondary outcomesLung function outcomes, symptoms, rescue medication, composite of exacerbations leading to either emergency department visit or hospital admission, withdrawals and adverse events did not differ statistically between treatments. Assessment of quality of life was limited to two studies, both of which gave results that did not reach statistical significance. One study reported one death out of 1000 participants on fluticasone/salmeterol and no deaths in a similar number of participants treated with budesonide/formoterol. No deaths were reported in the other studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statistical imprecision in the effect estimates for exacerbations and serious adverse events do not enable us to conclude that either therapy is superior. The uncertainty around the effect estimates justify further trials to provide more definitive conclusions; the overall quality of evidence based on GRADE recommendations for the three primary outcomes and withdrawals due to serious adverse events was moderate. We rated the quality of evidence for mortality to be low. Results for lung function outcomes showed that the drugs were sufficiently similar that further research is unlikely to change the effects. No trials were identified in the under-12s and research in this population is a high priority. Evaluation of quality of life is a priority for future research.

Effects on small airway obstruction of long-term treatments with beclomethasone/formoterol hydrofluoroalkane (metered-dose inhaler) versus fluticasone/salmeterol (dry-powder inhaler) in asthma: a preliminary study

New formulations of extrafine particles of long-acting beta-2 agonists plus inhaled corticosteroids (LABA + ICS) have been shown to reach peripheral regions of the lung. The aim of the study was to assess the effect on small airway obstruction of long-term treatments with two different LABA + ICS formulations in asthma. Ten subjects with moderate persistent asthma were enrolled. After a 4-week washout period they were treated in a randomized crossover design for 24 weeks with formoterol, 12 micrograms, and beclomethasone, 200 micrograms, hydrofluoroalkane (HFA; by metered-dose inhaler) b.i.d. (FB) or salmeterol, 50 micrograms, and fluticasone, 250 micrograms (by dry-powder inhaler), b.i.d. (SF). At baseline and at the end of each period subjects underwent an Asthma Control Test (ACT) and Pulmonary Function Testing. The N(2) phase III slope and closing volume (CV) during single-breath washout test and difference between the maximal expiratory flow rates with air and heliox at isovolume corresponding to 50% [Delta(heliox-air)MEF(50%)] were measured to assess changes on peripheral airways function. Two subjects dropped out and eight completed the study. After SF and FB, forced expiratory volume at 1 second (FEV(1); p < 0.01) and FEV(1)/forced vital capacity (FVC; p < 0.01 for SF and p < 0.05 for FB) increased when compared with baseline. Although both FB and SF treatments slightly increased delta(heliox-air)MEF(50% isovolume) versus baseline, only after FB the N(2) phase III slope and CV decreased from 1.61 ± 0.61%/L to 1.35 ± 0.49 N(2)%/L (p = 0.054) and from 0.98 ± 0.56 L to 0.88 ± 0.58 L (p < 0.05), respectively. ACT score raised from 19 ± 5 (baseline) to 23 ± 1 after FB (p < 0.02) and 23 ± 2 after SF (p < 0.05). When compared with baseline and in contrast to SF (50/250 micrograms b.i.d.), FB HFA (12/200 micrograms b.i.d.) significantly improved functional parameters reflecting small airway obstruction in asthmatic patients. Registered in the public trial registry at www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01255579.

Relationship between the anti-inflammatory properties of salmeterol/fluticasone and the expression of CD4⁺CD25⁺Foxp3⁺ regulatory T cells in COPD

BACKGROUND

Salmeterol and fluticasone combination (SFC) has anti-inflammatory effects and improves clinical symptoms in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, the anti-inflammatory mechanism of SFC remains unclear. In this study, we investigated the inflammatory responses of COPD, as well as the relationship of the inflammatory factors with the levels of CD4+CD25+Foxp3+ regulatory T cells (Foxp3+Tregs) after SFC therapy.

METHODS

Twenty-one patients with moderate or severe COPD received treatment with 50/500 μg of SFC twice a day for 12 weeks. Before and after treatment, the patients were evaluated using the Modified Medical Research Council (MMRC) dyspnea scale and by conducting a 6-min walk test. The number of neutrophils, monocytes and lymphocytes in induced sputum were counted. Levels of cytokines, including pre-inflammatory IL-8, TNF-α, IL-17A and cytokine IL-10, in the sputum supernatant and peripheral blood were measured by ELISA. The proportion of Foxp3+Tregs in the total CD4+ T cell of the peripheral blood was determined by flow cytometry. The relationship between IL-17A levels and the percentage of Foxp3+Tregs was analyzed by statistical analysis.

RESULTS

After treatment with SFC, the forced expiratory volume in 1 s as a percentage of predicted values (FEV1%) and the 6-min walk distance in the COPD patients significantly increased, while dyspnea scores decreased. The total number of cells, neutrophils, and the percentage of neutrophils in induced sputum reduced notably, while the proportion of monocytes was significantly increased. Levels of the inflammatory cytokines IL-8, TNF-α, and IL-17A in the sputum supernatant and in the blood were markedly lowered, while IL-10 levels were unchanged. The proportion of Foxp3+Tregs in the total CD4+T cell population in the peripheral blood was drastically higher than that before treatment. The level of IL-17A was negatively correlated with the proportion of Foxp3+Tregs in CD4+T cells.

CONCLUSION

SFC can reduce the levels of inflammatory factors and improve symptoms of COPD. The levels of inflammatory factors are associated with the variation of Foxp3+Tregs in COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered with http://www.chictr.org (Chinese Clinical Trial Register) as follows: ChiCTR-TNC-10001270.

Inhaled corticosteroids versus long-acting beta(2)-agonists for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta(2)-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids can be used as maintenance therapy by patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. These interventions are often taken together in a combination inhaler. However, the relative added value of the two individual components is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effects of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) compared to long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) on clinical outcomes in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (latest search August 2011) and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists in the treatment of patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and then extracted data on trial quality, study outcomes and adverse events. We also contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified seven randomised trials (5997 participants) of good quality with a duration of six months to three years. All of the trials compared ICS/LABA combination inhalers with LABA and ICS as individual components. Four of these trials included fluticasone and salmeterol monocomponents and the remaining three included budesonide and formoterol monocomponents. There was no statistically significant difference in our primary outcome, the number of patients experiencing exacerbations (odds ratio (OR) 1.22; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.67), or the rate of exacerbations per patient year (rate ratio (RR) 0.96; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.02) between inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta(2)-agonists. The incidence of pneumonia, our co-primary outcome, was significantly higher among patients on inhaled corticosteroids than on long-acting beta(2)-agonists whether classified as an adverse event (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.73) or serious adverse event (Peto OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.93). Results of the secondary outcomes analysis were as follows. Mortality was higher in patients on inhaled corticosteroids compared to patients on long-acting beta(2)-agonists (Peto OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.42), although the difference was not statistically significant. Patients treated with beta(2)-agonists showed greater improvements in pre-bronchodilator FEV(1) compared to those treated with inhaled corticosteroids (mean difference (MD) 18.99 mL; 95% CI 0.52 to 37.46), whilst greater improvements in health-related quality of life were observed in patients receiving inhaled corticosteroids compared to those receiving long-acting beta(2)-agonists (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) MD -0.74; 95% CI -1.42 to -0.06). In both cases the differences were statistically significant but rather small in magnitude. There were no statistically significant differences between ICS and LABA in the number of hospitalisations due to exacerbations, number of mild exacerbations, peak expiratory flow, dyspnoea, symptoms scores, use of rescue medication, adverse events, all cause hospitalisations, or withdrawals from studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Placebo-controlled trials have established the benefits of both long-acting beta-agonist and inhaled corticosteroid therapy for COPD patients as individual therapies. This review, which included trials allowing comparisons between LABA and ICS, has shown that the two therapies confer similar benefits across the majority of outcomes, including the frequency of exacerbations and mortality. Use of long-acting beta-agonists appears to confer a small additional benefit in terms of improvements in lung function compared to inhaled corticosteroids. On the other hand, inhaled corticosteroid therapy shows a small advantage over long-acting beta-agonist therapy in terms of health-related quality of life, but inhaled corticosteroids also increase the risk of pneumonia. This review supports current guidelines advocating long-acting beta-agonists as frontline therapy for COPD, with regular inhaled corticosteroid therapy as an adjunct in patients experiencing frequent exacerbations.

[Evidence of pharmacotherapy in COPD--key findings from recently-conducted randomized clinical studies]

The primary aim of pharmachotherapy in COPD is improvement of exertional dyspnea and quality of life through its bronchodilator effects. However, there is emerging evidence that pharmacotherapy may reduce exacerbations, alleviate annual decline of pulmonary function, and even favorably affect mortality, thus changing natural history of COPD. The large-scaled randomized clinical trials, such as TORCH, UPLIFT, have revealed that combination of long acting beta2 agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), LABA/ICS, and/or tiotropium alone may have such effects. In addition, carbocisteine, which is a mucolytic and anti-oxidant agent, has been shown to reduce exacerbations in COPD. Future directions on pharmacotherapy are personalized medicine based on phenotyping of the disease and development of new agents which may cure airway inflammation in COPD.

Most nocturnal asthma symptoms occur outside of exacerbations and associate with morbidity

BACKGROUND

Although nocturnal awakenings help categorize asthma severity and control, their clinical significance has not been thoroughly studied.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the clinical consequences of nocturnal asthma symptoms requiring albuterol (NASRAs) in children with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma outside of periods when oral corticosteroids were used for worsening asthma symptoms.

METHODS

Two hundred eighty-five children aged 6 to 14 years with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma were randomized to receive one of 3 controller regimens and completed daily symptom diaries for 48 weeks. Diary responses were analyzed for the frequency and consequences of NASRAs.

RESULTS

NASRAs occurred in 72.2% of participants at least once, and in 24.3% of participants, they occurred 13 or more times. The majority (81.3%) of nocturnal symptoms occurred outside of exacerbation periods and were associated the next day with the following events: albuterol use (56.9% of days preceded by nocturnal symptoms vs 18.1% of days not preceded by nocturnal symptoms; relative risk [RR], 2.3; 95% CI, 2.2-2.4), school absence (5.0% vs 0.3%; RR, 10.6; 95% CI, 7.8-14.4), and doctor contact (3.7% vs 0.2%; RR, 8.8; 95% CI, 6.1-12.5). Similar findings were noted during exacerbation periods (RRs of 1.7 for albuterol use, 5.5 for school absence, and 4.9 for doctor contacts). Nocturnal symptoms did not predict the onset of exacerbations.

CONCLUSION

Nocturnal symptoms requiring albuterol in children with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma receiving controller therapy occurred predominantly outside of exacerbation periods. Despite being poor predictors of exacerbations, they were associated with increases in albuterol use, school absences, and doctor contacts the day after nocturnal symptom occurrences.

Outcomes and costs associated with initial maintenance therapy with fluticasone propionate-salmeterol xinafoate 250 microg/50 microg combination versus tiotropium in commercially insured patients with COPD

PURPOSE

To compare, in commercially-insured individuals 240 years old, the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations and COPD-related health care utilization and costs in patients initiating maintenance treatment with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate 250 microg/50 microg (FSC) with those in patients initiating treatment with tiotropium bromide (TIO).

DESIGN

Retrospective observational cohort study.

METHODOLOGY

The risk of COPD exacerbation (moderate, severe, and any), COPD-related health care utilization, and COPD-related costs (overall and by service setting) were assessed over 12 months after the initiation of treatment with FSC or TIO in commercially-insured patients > or =40 years old diagnosed with COPD.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

After adjusting for covariates, treatment with FSC compared with treatment with TIO was associated with a 14% reduction in risk of severe exacerbation (p = 0.0406), defined as the occurrence of a COPD-related hospitalization; with less health care utilization across several categories of care; with 25% lower COPD-related medical costs ($1814 versus $2258 per patient, p < 0.0001); and with 10% lower COPD-related total costs ($2991 versus $3304 per patient, p < 0.0001) over a 12-month follow-up period. Pharmacy costs were equivalent between FSC and TIO.

CONCLUSION

Initiation of maintenance therapy with FSC compared with TIO was associated with significant reductions in the risk of severe exacerbations, health care utilization, and COPD-related medical and total costs. Considered in the context of other findings, these data suggest that earlier maintenance treatment with FSC offers clinical and economic benefits over maintenance treatment with TIO.

Efficacy and tolerability of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus fluticasone propionate in asthma patients: a randomized, double-blind study

BACKGROUND

A combination of salmeterol and fluticasone propionate (SAL/FP) has been shown to be effective in the treatment of asthma. We compared the efficacy and tolerability of SAL/FP (50/250 μg) with fluticasone propionate (FP) 250 μg administrated twice daily for 2 weeks in treating patients with mild to moderate asthma.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind study in adult patients with symptomatic asthma that was not controlled by 1000 μg/d inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone. 48 asthmatics were randomized to receive 2 inhalations of SAL/FP 50/250 μg bis in die (BID) or 2 inhalations of FP 250 μg BID, both delivered via Accuhaler device, for 2 weeks. The primary objective was the mean change from baseline in the mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) over the two week period. Other parameters included lung function, daily asthma symptom scores, evening PEF, percentage of days free of rescue medication use and daily rescue medication use. Tolerability was assessed by adverse events spontaneously elicited at clinic visits.

RESULTS

46 patients provided evaluable efficacy for analysis. The morning PEF improved significantly throughout the two weeks of treatment compared with baseline in the SAL/FP group. Mean morning PEF was 23.0 L/min higher in SAL/FP group than in FP group (p = 0.013). The change of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) from baseline was greater in SAL/FP group compared to FP group (p = 0.048). There were similar effects on day-time and night-time symptom scores, percentage symptom free days and nights and usage of salbutamol. 70.8% of the patients receiving SAL/FP were satisfied with the treatment, while only 26.1% of patients receiving FP alone were (p = 0.020). No death or acute exacerbation occurred.

CONCLUSION

SAL/FP 50/250 μg was safe and effective, and had a high level of patient satisfaction resulting in significantly greater increases in morning PEF and FEV1 compared to the use of FP 250 μg alone.

Budesonide/formoterol vs. salmeterol/fluticasone in COPD: a systematic review and adjusted indirect comparison of pneumonia in randomised controlled trials

AIMS

This analysis was designed to provide a comparison between budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone for the relative incidence of pneumonia adverse events, pneumonia serious adverse events and pneumonia-related mortality in patients being treated for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

METHODS

An initial literature search revealed no suitable head-to-head trials between budesonide/formoterol and salmeterol/fluticasone and therefore a systematic review was conducted to find randomised controlled trials providing data for input into an adjusted indirect comparison of the two combination treatments using placebo as a common comparator. The Bucher adjusted indirect comparison method was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Eight salmeterol/fluticasone trials and four budesonide/formoterol trials were identified as being relevant for the analyses. The proportion of patients experiencing a pneumonia adverse event was significantly lower with budesonide/formoterol than salmeterol/fluticasone (odds ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.80). The proportion of patients experiencing a pneumonia serious adverse event was also significantly lower with budesonide/formoterol than salmeterol/fluticasone (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.86). However, there were too few events to draw any firm conclusions on pneumonia-related mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the indirect comparison support the hypothesis that budesonide/formoterol is associated with fewer pneumonia events than salmeterol/fluticasone in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The limitations of the analysis are that the results from a single study, TORCH, have a large bearing on the overall findings of the analysis, and that there is heterogeneity in the length and the dosing of the included studies, although it does not appear that heterogeneity affected the reported results. Another important limitation is the lack of predefined diagnostic standards for pneumonia in these studies.

[Cost effectiveness of treatment with salmeterol/fluticasone compared to montelukast for the control of persistent asthma in children]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incremental cost-effectiveness of SFC compared with MON for the control of persistent asthma in children.

METHODS

We conducted an economic evaluation on a 12-week prospective randomized open-label parallel-group comparison of SFC versus MON in children with symptomatic asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids and short-acting β2-agonists. Asthma-related medication, unscheduled physician contacts and hospitalizations were collected prospectively. The main effectiveness measure was percentage of asthma-controlled week with no short-acting β2-agonist use during the study period. The analysis was conducted from the Mexican healthcare perspective using 2010 unit cost prices, and only direct costs were considered, all costs are reported in US dollar. . The model was made fully probabilistic to reflect the joint uncertainty in the model parameters.

RESULTS

Over the whole treatment period, the median percentages of asthma-controlled weeks were 83.3% in the SFC group and 66.7% in the MON group (SFC-MON difference, 16.7%; 95% CI, 8.3-16.7; P < 0.001 in favor of SFC). The mean total cost of the SFC regimen was $ 2,323 compared with $ 3,230 for the MON regimen. The SFC was the dominant strategy (both more effective and less expensive) using the SFC was associated with an incremental cost per additional asthma-controlled of $ (5,467). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis tested numerous assumptions about the model cost and efficacy parameters and found that the results were robust to most changes.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrates that, compared with MON, SFC may be cost saving from the Mexican health care perspective for the treatment of pediatric patients with asthma. SFC provided a reduction in the number of severe exacerbations, frequent asthma symptoms and rescue medication use. Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis indicated the dominance of SFC because of both lower costs and greater efficacy.