Treatment with 400 microg of inhaled budesonide vs 200 microg of inhaled budesonide and oral montelukast in children with moderate persistent asthma: randomized controlled trial

Best step-up treatments for children with uncontrolled asthma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty about the best treatment option for children/adolescents with uncontrolled asthma despite inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and international guidelines make different recommendations. We evaluated the pharmacological treatments to reduce asthma exacerbations and symptoms in uncontrolled patients age <18 years on ICS.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Technology Appraisals, National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment series, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry, conference abstracts and internal clinical trial registers (1 July 2014 to 5 May 2023) for randomised controlled trials of participants age <18 years with uncontrolled asthma on any ICS dose alone at screening. Studies before July 2014 were retrieved from previous systematic reviews/contact with authors. Patients had to be randomised to any dose of ICS alone or combined with long-acting β2-agonists (LABA) or combined with leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA), LTRA alone, theophylline or placebo. Primary outcomes were exacerbation and asthma control. The interventions evaluated were ICS (low/medium/high dose), ICS+LABA, ICS+LTRA, LTRA alone, theophylline and placebo.

RESULTS

Of the 4708 publications identified, 144 trials were eligible. Individual participant data were obtained from 29 trials and aggregate data were obtained from 19 trials. Compared with ICS Low, ICS Medium+LABA was associated with the lowest odds of exacerbation (OR 0.44, 95% credibility interval (95% CrI) 0.19-0.90) and with an increased forced expiratory volume in 1 s (mean difference 0.71, 95% CrI 0.35-1.06). Treatment with LTRA was the least preferred. No apparent differences were found for asthma control.

CONCLUSIONS

Uncontrolled children/adolescents on low-dose ICS should be recommended a change to medium-dose ICS+LABA to reduce the risk for exacerbation and improve lung function.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of double low-dose budesonide and low-dose budesonide plus montelukast among pediatric patients with persistent asthma receiving Step 3 treatment in China

AIMS

For children aged 1-5 years with persistent asthma, double low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended as the preferred Step 3 treatment and low-dose ICS plus leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) as an alternative. Budesonide inhalation suspension (0.5 mg daily) and montelukast (4.0 mg daily) are commonly used low-dose ICS and LTRA, respectively, among children in China. This study compared the cost-effectiveness of double low-dose budesonide vs. low-dose budesonide plus montelukast from a Chinese healthcare payer's perspective.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed with four health states (i.e. no exacerbation, mild exacerbation, moderate-to-severe exacerbation, and death). Transition probabilities were estimated based on exacerbation rates, case-fatality of hospitalized patients due to exacerbation, and natural mortality. Treatment adherence was considered and assumed to impact both drug costs and exacerbation rates. Costs (in 2019 Chinese Yuan [¥]) included drug costs and exacerbation management costs. Cost inputs and utilities for each health state were obtained from a public database and the literature. In-depth interviews were conducted with a health economics expert to validate the model, and a clinical expert to verify inputs and assumptions related to clinical practice. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated over a year. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Compared with low-dose budesonide plus montelukast, double low-dose budesonide was associated with lower costs (¥1,534 vs. ¥2,327), fewer exacerbation events (0.43 vs. 1.67) and slightly better QALYs (0.98 vs. 0.97). Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of the results and the generalizability of findings across geographic regions in China.

CONCLUSION

The cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that double low-dose budesonide is a dominant Step 3 treatment strategy compared with low-dose budesonide plus montelukast for patients aged 1-5 years with persistent asthma in China.

Montelukast and budesonide combination for children with chronic cough-variant asthma

This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of montelukast combined budesonide (MCB) treatment for children with chronic cough-variant asthma (CCVA).In total, 82 cases of children with CCVA, aged 4 to 11 years were included in this study. All cases received either MCB or budesonide alone between May 2015 and April 2017. The primary outcome was lung function, measured by the peak expiratory flow rates (PEFRs) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1). The secondary outcome was measured by the clinical assessment score. Furthermore, adverse events (AEs) were also recorded in this study. All outcomes were measured after 8-week treatment.After 8-week treatment, MCB showed greater effectiveness than did budesonide alone in improving the lung function, measured by PEFR V1 (P = .02), and FEV1 (P < .01). Similarly, the clinical assessment score also demonstrated significant difference between the 2 groups (P < .05). In addition, no serious AEs occurred in both groups.The results of this study demonstrate that the effectiveness of MCB is superior to budesonide alone in the treatment of children with CCVA.

Effectiveness of drug treatment strategies to prevent asthma exacerbations and increase symptom-free days in asthmatic children: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness and safety of current maintenance therapies that include inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), long-acting β-agonists (LABA) and/or leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) in preventing exacerbations and improving symptoms in pediatric asthma.

METHODS

A systematic review with network meta-analysis was conducted after a comprehensive search for relevant studies in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Clinical Trials databases, up to July 2014. Randomized clinical trials were selected comparing treatment strategies of the Global Initiative for Asthma guidelines. The full-text randomized clinical trials compared maintenance treatments for asthma in children (≤18 years) of ≥4 weeks duration, reporting exacerbations or symptom-free days. The primary and secondary effectiveness outcomes were the rates of moderate/severe exacerbations and symptom-free days from baseline, respectively. Withdrawal rates were taken as the safety outcome.

RESULTS

Included in the network meta-analysis was 35 trials, comprising 12,010 patients. For both primary and secondary outcomes, combined ICS and LABA was ranked first in effectiveness (OR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.52-0.97 and OR 1.23, 95% CI: 0.94-1.61, respectively, compared with low-dose ICS), but the result of secondary outcomes was statistically insignificant. Low-dose ICS, medium- or high-dose ICS and combined ICS and LTRA strategies were comparable in effectiveness. ICS monotherapies, and ICS + LABA and ICS + LTRA strategies were similarly safe. High-dose ICS had the highest rate of total withdrawals, but the difference was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined ICS and LABA treatments were most effective in preventing exacerbations among pediatric asthma patients. Medium- or high-dose ICS, combined ICS and LTRAs, and low-dose ICS treatments seem to be equally effective.

Addition of anti-leukotriene agents to inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of children with mild persistent asthma, low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are recommended as the preferred monotherapy (referred to as step 2 of therapy). In children with inadequate asthma control on low doses of ICS (step 2), asthma management guidelines recommend adding an anti-leukotriene agent to existing ICS as one of three therapeutic options to intensify therapy (step 3).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of the combination of anti-leukotriene agents and ICS to the use of the same, an increased, or a tapering dose of ICS in children and adolescents with persistent asthma who remain symptomatic despite the use of maintenance ICS. In addition, we wished to determine the characteristics of people or treatments, if any, that influenced the magnitude of response attributable to the addition of anti-leukotrienes.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR), which were derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, and CINAHL; and the handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts, as well as the www.clinicaltrials.gov website. The search was conducted until January 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered for inclusion randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in children and adolescents, aged one to 18 years, with asthma, who remained symptomatic despite the use of a stable maintenance dose of ICS and in whom anti-leukotrienes were added to the ICS if they were compared to the same, an increased, or a tapering dose of ICS for at least four weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methods expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Five paediatric (parallel group or cross-over) trials met the inclusion criteria. We considered two (40%) trials to be at a low risk of bias. Four published trials, representing 559 children (aged ≥ six years) and adolescents with mild to moderate asthma, contributed data to the review. No trial enrolled preschoolers. All trials used montelukast as the anti-leukotriene agent administered for between four and 16 weeks. Three trials evaluated the combination of anti-leukotrienes and ICS compared to the same dose of ICS alone (step 3 versus step 2). No statistically significant group difference was observed in the only trial reporting participants with exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids over four weeks (N = 268 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 1.91). There was also no statistically significant difference in percentage change in FEV₁ (forced expiratory volume in 1 second) with mean difference (MD) 1.3 (95% CI -0.09 to 2.69) in this trial, but a significant group difference was observed in the morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak expiratory flow rates (PEFR): N = 218 participants; MD 9.70 L/min (95% CI 1.27 to 18.13) and MD 10.70 (95% CI 2.41 to 18.99), respectively. One trial compared the combination of anti-leukotrienes and ICS to a higher-dose of ICS (step 3 versus step 3). No significant group difference was observed in this trial for participants with exacerbations requiring rescue oral corticosteroids over 16 weeks (N = 182 participants; RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.25), nor was there any significant difference in exacerbations requiring hospitalisation. There was no statistically significant group difference in withdrawals overall or because of any cause with either protocol. No trial explored the impact of adding anti-leukotrienes as a means to taper the dose of ICS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The addition of anti-leukotrienes to ICS is not associated with a statistically significant reduction in the need for rescue oral corticosteroids or hospital admission compared to the same or an increased dose of ICS in children and adolescents with mild to moderate asthma. Although anti-leukotrienes have been licensed for use in children for over 10 years, the paucity of paediatric trials, the absence of data on preschoolers, and the variability in the reporting of relevant clinical outcomes considerably limit firm conclusions. At present, there is no firm evidence to support the efficacy and safety of anti-leukotrienes as add-on therapy to ICS as a step-3 option in the therapeutic arsenal for children with uncontrolled asthma symptoms on low-dose ICS.

A systematic review with attempted network meta-analysis of asthma therapy recommended for five to eighteen year olds in GINA steps three and four

Background

The recommendations for the treatment of moderate persistent asthma in the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines for paediatric asthma are mainly based on scientific evidence extrapolated from studies in adults or on consensus. Furthermore, clinical decision-making would benefit from formal ranking of treatments in terms of effectiveness.

Our objective is to assess all randomized trial-based evidence specifically pertaining to 5-18 year olds with moderate persistent asthma. Rank the different drug treatments of GINA guideline steps 3&4 in terms of effectiveness.

Methods

Systematic review with network meta-analysis. After a comprehensive search in Central, Medline, Embase, CINAHL and the WHO search portal two reviewers selected RCTs performed in 4,129 children from 5-18 year old, with moderate persistent asthma comparing any GINA step 3&4 medication options. Further quality was assessed according the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and data-extracted included papers and built a network of the trials. Attempt at ranking treatments with formal statistical methods employing direct and indirect (e.g. through placebo) connections between all treatments.

Results

8,175 references were screened; 23 randomized trials (RCT), comparing head-to-head (n=17) or against placebo (n=10), met the inclusion criteria. Except for theophylline as add-on therapy in step 4, a closed network allowed all comparisons to be made, either directly or indirectly. Huge variation in, and incomplete reporting of, outcome measurements across RCTs precluded assessment of relative efficacies.

Conclusion

Evidence-based ranking of effectiveness of drug treatments in GINA steps 3&4 is not possible yet. Existing initiatives for harmonization of outcome measurements in asthma trials need urgent implementation.

Add-on montelukast vs double-dose budesonide in nonasthmatic eosinophilic bronchitis: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Budesonide at 800 μg/d is generally suggested for treatment of nonasthmatic eosinophilic bronchitis (NAEB). In asthma, adjunctive therapy with montelukast has been shown to confer addictive anti-inflammatory effects to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). However, whether such effects could be extrapolated to NAEB is not known.

OBJECTIVES

To study the efficacy and tolerability of add-on therapy with montelukast as compared to double-dose ICS in suppressing airway eosinophilia and decreasing cough severity in NAEB.

METHODS

In a randomized controlled trial, 26 nonsmoking, steroid-naïve NAEB patients presenting with chronic cough were treated with 800 μg/d budesonide or 400 μg/d budesonide plus montelukast 10 mg/d for 4 weeks. Cough visual analogue scale (CVAS) and eosinophil differential ratio in induced sputum (Eos) were monitored at baseline, Week 1, 2 and 4. Adverse events during treatment were recorded.

RESULTS

The two groups were comparable in age, gender distribution, cough duration, FEV(1)% predicted, FEV(1)/FEV ratio, baseline CVAS and geometric mean of Eos. Both regimens significantly reduced Eos and CVAS throughout the treatment course, with abrogation of sputum eosinophilia at end of therapy. There was no significant difference between the two groups in reduction of Eos and CVAS at all time points. Both regimens were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary study demonstrated that add-on montelukast might be an effective and well tolerated alternative to the generally suggested dose of ICS in treating steroid-naive NAEB, with suppression of eosinophilic inflammation, reduction of cough severity and sparing of ICS doses. (NCT01121016).

Anti-leukotriene agents compared to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Anti-leukotrienes (5-lipoxygenase inhibitors and leukotriene receptors antagonists) serve as alternative monotherapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of anti-leukotrienes compared to inhaled corticosteroids as monotherapy in adults and children with asthma and to provide better insight into the influence of patient and treatment characteristics on the magnitude of effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (1966 to Dec 2010), EMBASE (1980 to Dec 2010), CINAHL (1982 to Dec 2010), the Cochrane Airways Group trials register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Dec 2010), abstract books, and reference lists of review articles and trials. We contacted colleagues and the international headquarters of anti-leukotrienes producers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials that compared anti-leukotrienes with inhaled corticosteroids as monotherapy for a minimum period of four weeks in patients with asthma aged two years and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of trials and extracted data. The primary outcome was the number of patients with at least one exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids. Secondary outcomes included patients with at least one exacerbation requiring hospital admission, lung function tests, indices of chronic asthma control, adverse effects, withdrawal rates and biological inflammatory markers.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-five trials met the inclusion criteria for this review. Fifty-six trials (19 paediatric trials) contributed data (representing total of 10,005 adults and 3,333 children); 21 trials were of high methodological quality; 44 were published in full-text. All trials pertained to patients with mild or moderate persistent asthma. Trial durations varied from four to 52 weeks. The median dose of inhaled corticosteroids was quite homogeneous at 200 µg/day of microfine hydrofluoroalkane-propelled beclomethasone or equivalent (HFA-BDP eq). Patients treated with anti-leukotrienes were more likely to suffer an exacerbation requiring systemic corticosteroids (N = 6077 participants; risk ratio (RR) 1.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17, 1.96). For every 28 (95% CI 15 to 82) patients treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids, there was one additional patient with an exacerbation requiring rescue systemic corticosteroids. The magnitude of effect was significantly greater in patients with moderate compared with those with mild airway obstruction (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.41, 2.91 versus RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.97, 1.61), but was not significantly influenced by age group (children representing 23% of the weight versus adults), anti-leukotriene used, duration of intervention, methodological quality, and funding source. Significant group differences favouring inhaled corticosteroids were noted in most secondary outcomes including patients with at least one exacerbation requiring hospital admission (N = 2715 participants; RR 3.33; 95% CI 1.02 to 10.94), the change from baseline FEV(1) (N = 7128 participants; mean group difference (MD) 110 mL, 95% CI 140 to 80) as well as other lung function parameters, asthma symptoms, nocturnal awakenings, rescue medication use, symptom-free days, the quality of life, parents' and physicians' satisfaction. Anti-leukotriene therapy was associated with increased risk of withdrawals due to poor asthma control (N = 7669 participants; RR 2.56; 95% CI 2.01 to 3.27). For every thirty one (95% CI 22 to 47) patients treated with anti-leukotrienes instead of inhaled corticosteroids, there was one additional withdrawal due to poor control. Risk of side effects was not significantly different between both groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As monotherapy, inhaled corticosteroids display superior efficacy to anti-leukotrienes in adults and children with persistent asthma; the superiority is particularly marked in patients with moderate airway obstruction. On the basis of efficacy, the results support the current guidelines' recommendation that inhaled corticosteroids remain the preferred monotherapy. 

Montelukast in childhood asthma: what is the evidence for its use?

Asthma is a complex process involving extensive infiltration of the airway mucosa and lumen by activated inflammatory cells and release of mediators that result in airway inflammation and bronchoconstriction. Leukotrienes are mediators believed to play a major role in this process. At present, inhaled corticosteroids are the cornerstone of asthma management. However, asthma control may remain suboptimal and there is well-documented concern regarding adverse events with the use of inhaled corticosteroids in children. Leukotriene receptor antagonists, such as montelukast, provide a safe and effective treatment option with ease of administration, particularly in preschool children and as add-on therapy in patients with difficult-to-control asthma.

Pediatric asthma controller therapy

The treatment of children with asthma has historically relied upon expert opinion using data extrapolated from adult studies. Over the past few years, landmark studies have been completed providing healthcare professionals with evidence on which a reasonable approach can be made for children suffering from this common and serious disease. Asthmatic phenotype in children, unlike adults, tends to differ according to age, which must be taken into account as well as triggers, severity, and level of control. The care of the child with asthma is complex, but accumulating data have demonstrated that we are on the right path for optimizing control while reducing the burden of side effects. The newest Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines, as well as recent updates from the landmark CAMP (Childhood Asthma Management Program) study and information from the PACT (Pediatric Asthma Control Trial) and budesonide/formoterol controller and reliever studies, along with recent comparisons of higher dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), and ICS/long-acting β(2)-adrenoceptor agonist (LABA) combination and leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) therapies in children have clarified a few of the big questions in pediatric asthma. For children with asthma aged 5 years and older, the CAMP trial demonstrated that regular use of ICS reduces the frequency of symptoms; however, height was adversely affected and there is no evidence for altering the natural history of asthma. In patients aged 6 years and over whose asthma is uncontrolled on ICS alone, combination therapy with ICS and a LABA has been recently compared with the use of higher dose ICS and the addition of an LTRA in pediatric patients. The addition of a LABA statistically will be of most benefit; however, some children will have optimal control with doubling the baseline dose of ICS or addition of an LTRA. Use of budesonide/formoterol as a controller and reliever therapy extends the time to first exacerbation versus contemporary use of this medication in patients aged 4 years and older. Ciclesonide, a newer ICS, has demonstrated acceptable efficacy but has the added benefit of not affecting growth. Certainly, with mounting evidence, the care-map in pediatric asthma control is becoming clearer.

Management of childhood asthma in Western Australia

AIMS

The study aimed to determine how childhood asthma is managed in Western Australia by general practitioners (GPs) and specialist paediatricians.

METHODS

A questionnaire survey was sent to 992 GPs and specialist paediatricians, asking about practice and preferences regarding maintenance management of childhood asthma and treatment of acute asthma. Questions about asthma in infants, pre-school and school-aged children were asked separately.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 24.7%, with 188/878 (21.4%) of GPs and 44/62 (71.0%) of paediatricians returning the questionnaire. The decision to start maintenance therapy was generally based on symptom frequency and severity. The first choice for maintenance treatment in all age groups was inhaled corticosteroids (ICS). The second most common treatment varied according to age group, with short-acting beta(2)-agonist (SBA) preferred for infants, montelukast or short-acting beta(2)-agonist for pre-schoolers and combination therapy (ICS + long action beta(2)-agonist) for school-aged children. Objective monitoring of lung function with peak flow or spirometry, was used by 40% of GPs and 59% of paediatricians. Acute asthma was primarily managed with inhaled salbutamol and oral corticosteroids. There were few differences in treatment choice between GPs and paediatricians. Many GPs indicated that they did not treat asthma in infants without specialist consultation.

CONCLUSIONS

These data show good compliance by the minority of GPs responding to the survey and by paediatricians practising in Western Australia with current Australian asthma management guidelines. Major differences in treatment preferences between the groups were not detected.

Asthma in childhood

Management decisions for pediatric asthma (in patients younger than 12 years of age) based on extrapolation from available evidence in adolescents and adults (age 12 years and older) is common but rarely appropriate. This article addresses the disparity in response between the two age groups, presents the available pediatric evidence, and highlights the important areas in which further research is required. Evidence-based recommendations for acute and interval management of pediatric asthma are provided.