Safety of formoterol in patients with asthma: combined analysis of data from double-blind, randomized controlled trials

Comparing the efficacy and safety of formoterol/budesonide pMDI versus its mono-components and other LABA/ICS in patients with asthma

INTRODUCTION

Pressurised metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) are effective drug delivery devices prescribed in obstructive airway diseases due to their convenience, portability, ease of enabling multiple doses in a single formulation, and storage in any orientation. For the management of asthma, the fixed-dose combination of a long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) and an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) has been recommended by Global Initiative for Asthma guideline as a preferred treatment option for patients who are uncontrolled with only ICS doses. One of the available LABA/ICS combinations is the formoterol/budesonide (FB).

AREAS COVERED

This article systematically reviews the efficacy and safety of the FB pMDI compared with the FB dry powder inhaler (DPI), individual mono-components (formoterol and budesonide) or salmeterol/fluticasone (SF) combination in the treatment of asthma among paediatric and adult patients. PubMed was searched with the string: ''((Budesonide) AND Formoterol) AND ((((pMDI) OR MDI) OR Pressurised Metered-dose inhaler) OR Metered-dose inhaler)'', in ALL fields. Screening of all the articles was done till February 2020. We have included 24 articles from the total of 142 hits received.

CONCLUSIONS

The FB pMDI is efficacious for the long-term management of asthma in patients 6 years of age and above. It has been shown to improve lung function and asthma control, and to reduce daytime and night-time symptoms, the number of rescue medication doses and asthma exacerbations. It also showed rapid onset of bronchodilatory effect with a dose-response relationship that allows patients to utilise it as a Single Maintenance And Reliever Therapy (SMART) regimen.

Serious asthma events with mometasone furoate plus formoterol compared with mometasone furoate

BACKGROUND

The safety of long-acting β-agonists added to inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of persistent asthma has been controversial.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether administering formoterol in combination with mometasone furoate increases the risk of serious asthma outcomes (SAOs) compared with mometasone furoate alone. This clinical trial is registered as NCT01471340.

METHODS

We conducted a 26-week, randomized, double-blind trial in adolescent and adult patients (≥12 years) with persistent asthma in 35 countries with the primary objective of evaluating whether mometasone furoate-formoterol increases the risk of SAOs (adjudicated hospitalization, intubation, or death) compared with mometasone furoate alone. The key efficacy end point was asthma exacerbation (composite of hospitalization of ≥24 hours, emergency department visits of <24 hours requiring systemic corticosteroids, or use of systemic corticosteroids for ≥3 consecutive days).

RESULTS

Among 11,729 patients (mometasone furoate-formoterol, n = 5,868; mometasone furoate, n = 5,861), a total of 81 SAOs, all asthma-related hospitalizations, were observed in 71 patients: 45 events from 39 patients receiving mometasone furoate-formoterol and 36 events from 32 patients receiving mometasone furoate. The hazard ratio for the first SAO in the mometasone furoate-formoterol versus mometasone furoate group was 1.22 (95% CI, 0.76-1.94; P = .411). Asthma exacerbation occurred in 1,487 patients: 708 receiving mometasone furoate-formoterol and 779 receiving mometasone furoate. The hazard ratio for the first asthma exacerbation in the mometasone furoate-formoterol versus mometasone furoate group was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.80-0.98; P = .021).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of formoterol to mometasone furoate maintenance therapy did not increase the risk of serious asthma-related events and reduced the risk of asthma exacerbation.

Combined Analysis of Asthma Safety Trials of Long-Acting β2-Agonists

BACKGROUND

Safety concerns regarding long-acting β₂-agonists (LABAs) in asthma management were initially identified in a large postmarketing trial in which the risk of death was increased. In 2010, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) mandated that the four companies marketing LABAs for asthma perform prospective, randomized, controlled trials comparing the safety of combination therapy with a LABA plus an inhaled glucocorticoid with that of an inhaled glucocorticoid alone in adolescents (12 to 17 years of age) and adults. In conjunction with the FDA, the manufacturers harmonized their trial methods to allow an independent joint oversight committee to provide a final combined analysis of the four trials.

METHODS

As members of the joint oversight committee, we performed a combined analysis of the four trials comparing an inhaled glucocorticoid plus a LABA (combination therapy) with an inhaled glucocorticoid alone. The primary outcome was a composite of asthma-related intubation or death. Post hoc secondary outcomes included serious asthma-related events and asthma exacerbations.

RESULTS

Among the 36,010 patients in the intention-to-treat study, there were three asthma-related intubations (two in the inhaled-glucocorticoid group and one in the combination-therapy group) and two asthma-related deaths (both in the combination-therapy group) in 4 patients. In the secondary analysis of serious asthma-related events (a composite of hospitalization, intubation, or death), 108 of 18,006 patients (0.60%) in the inhaled-glucocorticoid group and 119 of 18,004 patients (0.66%) in the combination-therapy group had at least one composite event (relative risk in the combination-therapy group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.43; P=0.55); 2100 patients in the inhaled-glucocorticoid group (11.7%) and 1768 in the combination-therapy group (9.8%) had at least one asthma exacerbation (relative risk, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.89; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy with a LABA plus an inhaled glucocorticoid did not result in a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than treatment with an inhaled glucocorticoid alone but resulted in significantly fewer asthma exacerbations.

Concerns with beta2-agonists in pediatric asthma - a clinical perspective

Beta2-adrenoreceptor agonists (β2-agonists) are extensively used in the treatment of childhood asthma. However, there have been concerns regarding their adverse effects and safety. In 2005, the FDA commissioned a "Black Box Warning" communicating the potential for an increased risk for serious asthma exacerbations or asthma related deaths, with the regular use of LABAs. In a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials, the incidence of severe adverse events appeared to be highest in the 4-11 year age group. Several mechanisms have been proposed regarding the risk of regular use of β2-agonists, such as masking patients' perception of worsening asthma, desensitization and downregulation of the β2-adrenoreceptor, pro-inflammatory effects of β2-agonists, pharmacogenetic effects of β2-adrenoreceptor polymorphisms and age related differences in pathophysiology of asthma. In this paper, we review β2-receptor pharmacology, discuss the concerns regarding treatment with β2-agonists in childhood asthma, and provide suggestions for clinical pediatric practice in the light of current literature.

Serious Asthma Events with Budesonide plus Formoterol vs. Budesonide Alone

BACKGROUND

Concerns remain about the safety of adding long-acting β2-agonists to inhaled glucocorticoids for the treatment of asthma. In a postmarketing safety study mandated by the Food and Drug Administration, we evaluated whether the addition of formoterol to budesonide maintenance therapy increased the risk of serious asthma-related events in patients with asthma.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind, 26-week study, we randomly assigned patients, 12 years of age or older, who had persistent asthma, were receiving daily asthma medication, and had had one to four asthma exacerbations in the previous year to receive budesonide-formoterol or budesonide alone. Patients with a history of life-threatening asthma were excluded. The primary end point was the first serious asthma-related event (a composite of adjudicated death, intubation, and hospitalization), as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The noninferiority of budesonide-formoterol to budesonide was defined as an upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The primary efficacy end point was the first asthma exacerbation, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 11,693 patients underwent randomization, of whom 5846 were assigned to receive budesonide-formoterol and 5847 to receive budesonide. A serious asthma-related event occurred in 43 patients who were receiving budesonide-formoterol and in 40 patients who were receiving budesonide (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.65]); budesonide-formoterol was shown to be noninferior to budesonide alone. There were two asthma-related deaths, both in the budesonide-formoterol group; one of these patients had undergone an asthma-related intubation. The risk of an asthma exacerbation was 16.5% lower with budesonide-formoterol than with budesonide (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.94; P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Among adolescents and adults with predominantly moderate-to-severe asthma, treatment with budesonide-formoterol was associated with a lower risk of asthma exacerbations than budesonide and a similar risk of serious asthma-related events. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01444430 .).

Serious Asthma Events with Fluticasone plus Salmeterol versus Fluticasone Alone

BACKGROUND

The safe and appropriate use of long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs) for the treatment of asthma has been widely debated. In two large clinical trials, investigators found a potential risk of serious asthma-related events associated with LABAs. This study was designed to evaluate the risk of administering the LABA salmeterol in combination with an inhaled glucocorticoid, fluticasone propionate.

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, adolescent and adult patients (age, ≥12 years) with persistent asthma were assigned to receive either fluticasone with salmeterol or fluticasone alone for 26 weeks. All the patients had a history of a severe asthma exacerbation in the year before randomization but not during the previous month. Patients were excluded from the trial if they had a history of life-threatening or unstable asthma. The primary safety end point was the first serious asthma-related event (death, endotracheal intubation, or hospitalization). Noninferiority of fluticasone-salmeterol to fluticasone alone was defined as an upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the risk of the primary safety end point of less than 2.0. The efficacy end point was the first severe asthma exacerbation.

RESULTS

Of 11,679 patients who were enrolled, 67 had 74 serious asthma-related events, with 36 events in 34 patients in the fluticasone-salmeterol group and 38 events in 33 patients in the fluticasone-only group. The hazard ratio for a serious asthma-related event in the fluticasone-salmeterol group was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.66), and noninferiority was achieved (P=0.003). There were no asthma-related deaths; 2 patients in the fluticasone-only group underwent asthma-related intubation. The risk of a severe asthma exacerbation was 21% lower in the fluticasone-salmeterol group than in the fluticasone-only group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.89), with at least one severe asthma exacerbation occurring in 480 of 5834 patients (8%) in the fluticasone-salmeterol group, as compared with 597 of 5845 patients (10%) in the fluticasone-only group (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received salmeterol in a fixed-dose combination with fluticasone did not have a significantly higher risk of serious asthma-related events than did those who received fluticasone alone. Patients receiving fluticasone-salmeterol had fewer severe asthma exacerbations than did those in the fluticasone-only group. (AUSTRI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01475721.).

Ethnic differences in adverse drug reactions to asthma medications: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Information on ethnic diversity of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to asthma medications is rare despite evidence suggesting higher risk for African Americans when using β2-adrenergic receptor agonists. The objectives are to investigate how ethnic background was involved in ADR assessment and to examine the relationship between ethnic background and ADRs to asthma medications.

METHODS

MEDLINE was searched until March 2014. All types of studies reporting ADRs to asthma medications involving more than one ethnic group were included. Extracted information includes study designs, ethnic backgrounds, intervention, and types and severities of ADRs.

RESULTS

Among the selected 15 randomised clinical trials, six pooled analyses of randomized clinical trials, and five prospective observational studies, only six studies compared ADRs across different ethnic groups. The majority of the comparisons were either statistically insignificant or inconclusive.

CONCLUSIONS

Ethnicity was largely overlooked. Most studies neglected to report ADRs by ethnicity. Lack of consistency in defining ethnicities complicated further pooled analyses. Despite the higher prevalence of asthma among specific ethnic minority groups, few studies disaggregated information by ethnic background, and reports of ADRs to asthma medications in different ethnic groups were rare. We suggest that the inclusion of ADR analysis by different ethnic backgrounds is desirable.

Addition to inhaled corticosteroids of leukotriene receptor antagonists versus theophylline for symptomatic asthma: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are widely used in combination with second controller medications in the management of asthma in adults and children. There lacks a systematic comparison between addition of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) and theophylline to ICS. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the difference of the efficacy and safety profile of adding either LTRAs or theophylline to ICS in adults and children with symptomatic asthma.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published prior to November 2014 were acquired through systematically searching and selected based on the established inclusion criteria for publications. The data extracted from the included studies were further analyzed by a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We included eight RCTs, of which six recruited adults and two recruited children aged 5 to 14 years. The primary outcomes were changes in lung function from baseline, including forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow (PEF). Overall, addition of LTRAs led to significantly better morning PEF {mean difference (MD) 16.94 [95% confidence interval (CI): 11.49-22.39] L/min, P<0.01} and FEV1 [MD 0.09 (95% CI: 0.03-0.15) L, P=0.005] as compared to addition of theophylline. There were no differences between the two treatments in terms of evening PEF, adverse events, rescue medication use and asthma exacerbation.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of LTRA and ICS leads to modestly greater improvement in lung function than the combination of theophylline and ICS in the treatment of symptomatic asthma. Long-term trials are required to assess the efficacy and safety of these two therapies.

Fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate in fixed-dose combination for the treatment of asthma

A new combination inhaler containing fluticasone, a potent inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), and formoterol, a long-acting β-agonist (LABA) with rapid onset and sustained bronchodilator effect, has been approved for treatment of persistent asthma in patients ≥12 years of age requiring combination ICS-LABA therapy. The fluticasone/formoterol combination, delivered via pressurized metered-dose inhaler and available in three dose strengths, has demonstrated a good safety and tolerability profile in trials of up to 1 year. The efficacy of fluticasone/formoterol is greater than that of fluticasone or formoterol alone and noninferior to that of fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol in tightly controlled 8-12-week clinical trials. Advantages of the fluticasone/formoterol combination aerosol include rapid onset of bronchodilation, an attribute preferred by patients, and emission of a high fine-particle fraction that is consistent at different flow rates, which may aid consistency of delivery (given patient variability in inhalation maneuvers) and provide real-life benefits.

Allergic disorders at a venerable age: a mini-review

This review focuses on 3 allergic disorders of persons coming up against venerable age: asthma, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis. The prevalence of allergic diseases in the elderly ranges from 5 to 10% and appears to be rising. A gradual decline in immune function, termed immunosenescence, and age-related changes in tissue structure influence the development of these disorders. Common complications are comorbidities, polypharmacy, and adverse effects of drugs. The elderly have difficulty mounting protective immune responses against newly encountered antigens. The integrity of epithelial barriers is compromised, leading to a chronic, subclinical inflammatory state and an enhanced Th2 (allergic) immune response. Undiagnosed asthma is frequent in elderly persons (about 8%) and still more commonplace in those with respiratory symptoms. Poorly controlled asthma in the elderly undermines their functional status and leads to a loss of autonomy and social isolation that may delay seeking medical services. Aggravation of allergic rhinitis coincides with exacerbation of asthma, whereas treatment of nasal inflammation improves control of the asthma. Atopic dermatitis is a chronically relapsing inflammatory skin disease often associated with respiratory allergy.

Inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting β2-agonist pharmacological profiles: effective asthma therapy in practice

Fixed-dose combinations of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting β2-agonists (LABAs) have been used to manage asthma for several years. They are the preferred therapy option for patients who do not achieve optimal control of their asthma with low-dose ICS monotherapy. In Europe, four ICS/LABA products are commercially available for asthma maintenance therapy (fluticasone propionate/formoterol fumarate, fluticasone propionate/salmeterol xinafoate, budesonide/formoterol fumarate and beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol fumarate), and other combinations are likely to be developed over the next few years (e.g. mometasone/formoterol fumarate, fluticasone furoate/vilanterol, mometasone/indacaterol). Data from randomized, controlled, clinical trials do not demonstrate a clear overall efficacy difference among ICS/LABA combinations approved for asthma therapy. Conversely, pharmacological data indicate that there may be certain advantages to using one ICS or LABA over another because of the specific pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiles associated with particular treatments. This review article summarizes the pharmacological characteristics oft he various ICSs and LABAs available for the treatment of asthma, including the potential for ICS and LABA synergy, and gives an insight into the rationale for the development of the latest ICS/LABA combination approved for asthma maintenance therapy.

Asthma heterogeneity and therapeutic options from the clinic to the bench

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Asthma is a chronic pulmonary inflammatory disease affecting all races, children and adults. The causative or intrinsic development of asthma is diverse, ranging from episodic exposure to environmental insults to physical induction in exercise.

RECENT FINDINGS

Asthma uniquely manifests in affected individuals as episodes of airway hyper-reactivity, chronic airway obstruction, and inflammation. The diversity in asthmatic phenotypes and the mechanisms that lead to initiation and perpetuation of the lung disease continue to make asthma a challenge to treat, classify, and manage therapeutically.

SUMMARY

This review will focus on the newest of mechanistic insights into asthma development, therapeutic innovations, and clinical applications.

Long-term safety and asthma control measures with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler in African American asthmatic patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Information surrounding the long-term safety of combination inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting β(2)-adrenergic agonist medications in African American asthmatic patients is limited.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess safety and asthma control with a budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) versus budesonide over 1 year in African American patients.

METHODS

This 52-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase 3B safety study (NCT00419952) was conducted in 742 self-reported African American patients 12 years or older with moderate-to-severe asthma previously receiving medium- to high-dose inhaled corticosteroids. After 2 weeks using a 320 μg twice-daily budesonide pMDI, patients were randomized 1:1 to 320/9 μg twice-daily budesonide/formoterol pMDI or 320 μg twice-daily budesonide pMDI.

RESULTS

Both treatments were well tolerated. Asthma exacerbation incidence and rate (per patient-treatment year) were lower with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide (incidence, 7.7% vs 14.0% [P= .006]; rate ratio, 0.615 [P= .002]). Time to first asthma exacerbation was longer (P= .018) with budesonide/formoterol versus budesonide. The most common adverse events, regardless of study drug relationship, were headache (9.5% and 7.7%), nasopharyngitis (6.9% and 8.0%), sinusitis (4.0% and 6.3%), and viral upper respiratory tract infection (5.8% and 4.4%) for budesonide/formoterol and budesonide, respectively. Serious adverse events occurred in 12 and 15 patients, respectively; none were considered drug related. No substantial or unexpected patterns of abnormalities were observed in laboratory, electrocardiographic, or Holter monitoring assessments. Hospitalization caused by asthma exacerbation occurred in 0 and 4 patients in the budesonide/formoterol and budesonide groups, respectively. Pulmonary function and asthma control measures generally favored budesonide/formoterol.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population budesonide/formoterol pMDI was well tolerated over 12 months, with a safety profile similar to that of budesonide; the asthma exacerbation rate was reduced by 38.5% versus budesonide.

Age and risks of FDA-approved long-acting β₂-adrenergic receptor agonists

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk, by age group, of serious asthma-related events with long-acting β(2)-adrenergic receptor agonists marketed in the United States for asthma.

METHODS

The US Food and Drug Administration performed a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials comparing the risk of LABA use with no LABA use for patients 4 to 11, 12 to 17, 18 to 64, and older than 64 years old. The effects of age on a composite of asthma-related deaths, intubations, and hospitalizations (asthma composite index) and the effects of concomitant inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use were analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred ten trials with 60 954 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The composite event incidence difference for all ages was 6.3 events per 1000 patient-years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2-10.3) for using LABAs compared with not using LABAs. The largest incidence difference was observed for the 4- to 11-year age group (30.4 events per 1000 patient-years [95% CI: 5.7-55.1]). Differences according to age were statistically significant (P = .020). Results for the subgroup of patients with concomitant ICS use (n = 36 210) were similar to the overall results; with assigned ICSs (n = 15 192), the incidence difference was 0.4 events per 1000 patient-years (95% CI: -3.8 to 4.6), and there was no statistically significant difference according to age group.

CONCLUSIONS

The excess of serious asthma-related events attributable to LABAs was greatest among children. Additional data are needed to assess risks of LABA use for children with simultaneous ICS use.

Controversies regarding long-acting β2-agonists

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review examines the literature regarding the efficacy and safety of long-acting β2-agonists as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2009 guidelines and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) 2007 asthma guidelines recommend adding long-acting β2-agonists to patients inadequately controlled on inhaled corticosteroids. These recommendations must be balanced against published data which demonstrate a signal of increased morbidity and mortality with use of long-acting β2-agonists. These conflicting data raise the question of whether or not there may be genotypic or phenotypic discriminators leading to disparate responses to long-acting β2-agonists.

SUMMARY

The combination of long-acting β2-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids demonstrates improvement in asthma control and exacerbation rates; however, long-acting β2-agonists are not recommended for use as monotherapy or without optimization of inhaled corticosteroid dose. Although the majority of asthmatic patients appear to benefit from the addition of long-acting β2-agonists, there are concerns that a small proportion of patients, including steroid-naïve patients and African Americans, may not obtain such benefits. Thus far, studies have not clearly demonstrated genotypic or phenotypic differences explaining the variability in response.

Advances in environmental and occupational respiratory disease in 2010

2010 Found a number of significant advances in environmental and occupational respiratory disease. The role of sensitization and the subsequent production of allergic disease have been explored. New allergens and their T- and B-cell epitopes have been characterized. Novel approaches to the diagnosis and evaluation of food allergy have been described. The role of pollutants as they affect respiratory disease and the effects of age extremes on sensitization and asthma have been addressed. Significant advances in the understanding of inflammatory changes in both the upper and lower respiratory systems occurred. Novel therapeutic approaches have been explored, including the development of hypoallergens from improved molecular biology techniques. New effective approaches to asthma therapy have been identified. Exposure reduction through air filtration and novel immunotherapy approaches, such as sublingual therapy, have made significant advances.

Addition of theophylline or increasing the dose of inhaled corticosteroid in symptomatic asthma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Low-dose theophylline has anti-inflammatory effects. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of adding theophylline compared with increasing the dose of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) on symptomatic asthma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The associated literature was acquired through deliberate searching and selected based on the established inclusion criteria for publications. The extracted data were further analyzed by a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Four randomized, controlled, parallel studies were selected. Addition of theophylline produced a greater increase of forced expiratory volume in one second as %predicted (FEV₁pred) by 2.49% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.99-3.00; z = 9.70; p < 0.001], compared with increasing the dose of ICS. There was no difference between the two treatments in terms of peak expiratory flow (PEF).

CONCLUSION

Addition of theophylline to ICS has similar therapeutic effects on improving lung function as increasing the dose of ICS in the treatment of symptomatic asthma.

Advances in pediatric asthma in 2010: addressing the major issues

Last year's "Advances in pediatric asthma" concluded with the following statement: "If we can close these [remaining] gaps through better communication, improvements in the health care system and new insights into treatment, we will move closer to better methods to intervene early in the course of the disease and induce clinical remission as quickly as possible in most children." This year's summary will focus on recent advances in pediatric asthma that take steps moving forward as reported in Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology publications in 2010. Some of these recent reports show us how to improve asthma management through steps to better understand the natural history of asthma, individualize asthma care, reduce asthma exacerbations, and manage inner-city asthma and some potential new ways to use available medications to improve asthma control. It is clear that we have made many significant gains in managing asthma in children, but we have a ways to go to prevent asthma exacerbations, alter the natural history of the disease, and reduce health disparities in asthma care. Perhaps new directions in personalized medicine and improved health care access and communication will help maintain steady progress in alleviating the burden of this disease in children, especially young children.

Treatment with budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler in patients with asthma: a focus on patient-reported outcomes

In the United States, budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) is approved for treatment of asthma in patients aged ≥12 years whose asthma is not adequately controlled with an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) or whose disease severity clearly warrants treatment with an ICS and a long-acting β₂-adrenergic agonist. This article reviews studies of budesonide/formoterol pMDI in patients with persistent asthma, with a particular focus on patient-reported outcomes (eg, perceived onset of effect, patient satisfaction with treatment, health-related quality of life [HRQL], global assessments, sleep quality and quantity), as these measures reflect patient perceptions of asthma control and disease burden. A search of PubMed and respiratory meetings was performed to identify relevant studies. In two pivotal budesonide/formoterol pMDI studies in adolescents and adults, greater efficacy and similar tolerability were shown with budesonide/formoterol pMDI 160/9 μg and 320/9 μg twice daily versus its monocomponents or placebo. In those studies, improvements in HRQL, patient satisfaction, global assessments of asthma control, and quality of sleep also favored budesonide/formoterol pMDI compared with one or both of its monocomponents or placebo. Budesonide/formoterol pMDI has a rapid onset of effect (within 15 minutes) that patients can feel, an attribute that may have benefits for treatment adherence. In summary, budesonide/formoterol pMDI is effective and well tolerated and has additional therapeutic benefits that may be important from the patient’s perspective.

Budesonide/formoterol in the treatment of asthma

Budesonide and formoterol are available in a combined inhaler that offers therapeutic advantages in the treatment of asthma. The rapid onset of bronchodilation seen with formoterol means that budesonide/formoterol can be used as both maintenance and relief therapy. This approach has been shown to reduce exacerbations and overcome the problem of patients who overuse short-acting &#x03B2;-agonists at the expense of inhaled corticosteroids. Concerns regarding safety of long-acting &#x03B2;-agonists have not been confirmed in studies of the budesonide/formoterol combination inhaler, and we believe the benefits of this medication clearly outweigh any possible small increased risk.

Treatment of persistent asthma with Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol inhalation aerosol): an inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist in one pressurized metered-dose inhaler

OBJECTIVE

Budesonide/formoterol inhalation aerosol (Symbicort AstraZeneca, Wilmington, Delaware) is an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonist (LABA) combination administered twice daily via one hydrofluoroalkane pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) approved in the United States for the long-term maintenance treatment of persistent asthma in patients >or=12 years of age whose asthma cannot be controlled by an ICS alone. The objective was to review efficacy, safety, and pharmacogenetic data on budesonide/formoterol pMDI in the treatment of persistent asthma.

METHODS

The authors searched PubMed and respiratory meeting databases to identify asthma studies of budesonide/formoterol pMDI. Studies involving traditional and patient-reported outcomes, safety, tolerability, or pharmacogenetics were included.

RESULTS

In two 12-week pivotal trials in adolescents and adults, treatment with budesonide/formoterol pMDI 160/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (320/9 microg) twice daily for moderate to severe persistent asthma or 80/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (160/9 microg) twice daily for mild to moderate persistent asthma, demonstrated greater efficacy and similar tolerability compared with placebo and the same nominal dose of its monocomponents. Comparisons with formoterol dry powder inhaler (DPI) for predose forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) and with budesonide pMDI for 12-hour mean postdose FEV(1) demonstrated the anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory contributions of budesonide and formoterol, respectively. Evaluations of patient-reported outcomes, including asthma-specific quality of life and treatment satisfaction, further supported the clinical benefits of budesonide/formoterol pMDI. In a 52-week tolerability study of patients aged >or=12 years, budesonide/formoterol pMDI was delivered at up to double the maximum dose (640/18 microg twice daily) and demonstrated a safety profile similar to that of budesonide (640 microg twice daily), with no unexpected pattern of abnormalities. Additional studies reported that budesonide/formoterol pMDI 320/9 microg twice daily and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol DPI 250/50 microg twice daily have similar efficacy and tolerability, with significantly more patients achieving >or=15% improvement in FEV(1) within 15 minutes with budesonide/formoterol pMDI compared with fluticasone/salmeterol DPI. Moreover, inheritance of the Gly16Arg polymorphism of the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor does not appear to affect clinical outcomes with budesonide/formoterol pMDI.

CONCLUSION

Budesonide/formoterol pMDI administered twice daily is effective and generally well tolerated in patients whose asthma is not well controlled on ICS alone.