A systematic review and meta-analysis: tailoring asthma treatment on eosinophilic markers (exhaled nitric oxide or sputum eosinophils)

Asthma severity and control can be measured both subjectively and objectively. Traditionally asthma treatments have been individualised using symptoms and spirometry/peak flow. Increasingly treatment tailored in accordance with inflammatory markers (sputum eosinophil counts or fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) data) is advocated as an alternative strategy. The objective of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of tailoring asthma interventions based on inflammatory markers (sputum analysis and FeNO) in comparison with clinical symptoms (with or without spirometry/peak flow) for asthma-related outcomes in children and adults. Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and reference lists of articles were searched. The last searches were in February 2009. All randomised controlled comparisons of adjustment of asthma treatment based on sputum analysis or FeNO compared with traditional methods (primarily clinical symptoms and spirometry/peak flow) were selected. Results of searches were reviewed against predetermined criteria for inclusion. Relevant studies were selected, assessed and data extracted independently by at least two people. The trial authors were contacted for further information. Data were analysed as 'intervention received' and sensitivity analyses performed. Six (2 adults and 4 children/adolescent) studies utilising FeNO and three adult studies utilising sputum eosinophils were included. These studies had a degree of clinical heterogeneity including definition of asthma exacerbations, duration of study and variations in cut-off levels for percentage of sputum eosinophils and FeNO to alter management in each study. Adults who had treatment adjusted according to sputum eosinophils had a reduced number of exacerbations compared with the control group (52 vs. 77 patients with ≥1 exacerbation in the study period; p=0.0006). There was no significant difference in exacerbations between groups for FeNO compared with controls. The daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids at the end of the study was decreased in adults whose treatment was based on FeNO in comparison with the control group (mean difference -450.03 μg, 95% CI -676.73 to -223.34; p<0.0001). However, children who had treatment adjusted according to FeNO had an increase in their mean daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids (mean difference 140.18 μg, 95% CI 28.94 to 251.42; p=0.014). It was concluded that tailoring of asthma treatment based on sputum eosinophils is effective in decreasing asthma exacerbations. However, tailoring of asthma treatment based on FeNO levels has not been shown to be effective in improving asthma outcomes in children and adults. At present, there is insufficient justification to advocate the routine use of either sputum analysis (due to technical expertise required) or FeNO in everyday clinical practice.

Ciclesonide versus other inhaled steroids for chronic asthma in children and adults

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are an integral part of asthma management, and act as an anti-inflammatory agent in the airways of the lung. These agents confer both significant benefit in terms of symptom management and improvement in lung function, but may also cause harm in terms of local and systemic side-effects. Ciclesonide is a novel steroid that is metabolised to its active component in the lung, making it a potentially useful for reducing local side effects.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and adverse effects of ciclesonide relative to those of other inhaled corticosteroids in the management of chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials with pre-defined terms. Additional searches of PubMed and Clinicalstudyresults.org were undertaken. The literature searches for this review are current up to June 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised parallel or crossover studies were eligible for the review. We included studies comparing ciclesonide with other steroids both at nominally equivalent dose or lower doses of ciclesonide.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Adverse effects information was collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty one trials involving 7243 participants were included. Equal daily doses of ciclesonide and beclomethasone (BDP) or budesonide (BUD) gave similar results for peak expiratory flow rates (PEF), although forced vital capacity (FVC) was higher with ciclesonide. Data on forced expired volume in one second (FEV1) were inconsistent. Withdrawal data and symptoms were similar between treatments. Compared with the same dose of fluticasone (FP), data on lung function parameters (FEV1, FVC and PEF) did not differ significantly. Paediatric quality of life score favoured ciclesonide. Candidiasis was less frequent with ciclesonide, although other side-effect outcomes did not give significant differences in favour of either treatment. When lower doses of ciclesonide were compared to BDP or BUD, the difference in FEV1 did not reach significance but we cannot exclude a significant effect in favour of BDP/BUD. Other lung function outcomes did not give significant differences between treatments. Paediatric quality of life scores did not differ between treatments. Adverse events occurred with similar frequency between ciclesonide and BDP/BUD. Comparison with FP at half the nominal dose was undertaken in three studies, which indicated that FEV1 was not significantly different, but was not equivalent between the treatments (per protocol: -0.05 L 95% confidence intervals -0.11 to 0.01).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review give some support to ciclesonide as an equivalent therapy to other ICS at similar nominal doses. The studies assessed low doses of steroids, in patients whose asthma required treatment with low doses of steroids. At half the dose of FP and BDP/BUD, the effects of ciclesonide were more inconsistent The effect on candidiasis may be of importance to people who find this to be problematic. The role of ciclesonide in the management of asthma requires further study, especially in paediatric patients. Further assessment against FP at a dose ratio of 1:2 is a priority.

Ciclesonide versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids are an integral part of asthma management, and act as an anti-inflammatory agent in the airways of the lung. These agents confer significant benefit in terms of symptom management and improvement in lung function, but may also cause harm in terms of local and systemic side-effects. Ciclesonide is a novel steroid that has efficient distribution and release properties that mean it can be taken once daily, making it potentially useful in ongoing asthma management.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of inhaled ciclesonide in adults and children with chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials with pre-defined terms. Additional searches of CENTRAL and PubMed were undertaken. The literature searches for this review are current up to June 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised parallel or crossover studies were eligible for the review. We included studies comparing ciclesonide with placebo, and we also included studies comparing ciclesonide at different doses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed studies for inclusion in the review, extracted data independently and checked each others' work. We contacted study investigators in order to obtain additional data. Extracted data were entered into RevMan 4.2 and analysed as fixed effect mean differences for continuous data, and fixed effect risk ratios for dichotomous data.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighteen trials (reporting 20 study comparisons) met the review entry criteria. We report findings from 18 group comparisons where data were available (6343 participants, of whom 1692 were children). Ciclesonide versus placebo: The short duration of the included studies means that there is a lack of data with respect to the impact of ciclesonide on asthma exacerbations. At doses of 100 mcg/d or less up to 400 mcg/d in mild to moderate asthma, ciclesonide improved lung function, asthma symptoms and rescue inhaler use, compared with placebo.Dose response outcomes: Comparisons of 100 versus 200 mcg/d, 100 versus 400 mcg/d and 400 versus 800 mcg/d did not yield significant differences in lung function outcomes. Adverse event data were not available in sufficient detail to permit assessment of the safety profile of this drug.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ciclesonide was more effective than placebo, in the short term, in improving lung function in patients with mild to moderate asthma previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids. There remain questions as to dose response, and the lack of data on the longer term impact on exacerbations and safety profile should be addressed in future studies.

Herbal interventions for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Herb and plant based preparations are a popular treatment for asthma, although there remain concerns as to their efficacy and safety. In Western societies, motivations for using such treatments may be both positive and negative, with their perceived safety and dissatisfaction with conventional medicine among them. In China such treatments are more commonly used and many compounds considered 'conventional' are derived from herbs or plants.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of herb and plant extracts in the management of chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and AMED were searched with pre-defined terms. Searches are current as of February 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised placebo controlled trials of any herb or plant extract were eligible. Study participants had to have a primary diagnosis of asthma. Studies in both adults and children were eligible for the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed studies for suitability. Data were extracted and double-checked.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies (29 experimental groups) met the review entry criteria, randomising a total of 1925 participants. The studies identified assessed the effects of 21 different herbal preparations. Study quality varied considerably, and the sample sizes were often small. For primary outcomes (exacerbations, steroids use and lung function measurements): Two out of six studies reporting change in FEV1 were positive, with very few data available on the frequency of exacerbations. One study which did report these data was negative. Health-related quality of life was only measured in one trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for the effects of herbal treatments is hampered by the variety of treatments assessed, poor reporting quality of the studies and lack of available data. The data that are available from the studies provide only a small insight into the long-term efficacy and harm profiles of these treatments. The absence of common endpoint measurements limits the validity of our findings further. Positive findings in this review warrant additional well-designed trials in this area.

Meta-analysis of respiratory rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A Cochrane systematic review

BACKGROUND

The widespread application of pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be preceded by demonstrable improvements in function attributable to the programs.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of rehabilitation on health-related quality of life (QoL) and exercise capacity in patients with COPD.

METHODS

We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register. We selected RCTs of rehabilitation in patients with COPD in which quality of life (QoL) and/or exercise capacity were measured. Rehabilitation was defined as exercise training for at least 4 weeks with or without education and/or psychological support. Control groups received conventional community care without rehabilitation.

RESULTS

A total of 31 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. We found statistically significant improvements for all the outcomes. In 4 important domains of QoL (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire scores for Dyspnea, Fatigue, Emotional function and Mastery), the effect was larger than the minimal clinically important difference. For exercise capacity, the effect was small and slightly below the threshold of clinical significance for the six-minute walking distance (WMD: 48 m; 95% CI: 32 to 65; n = 16 trials).

CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation relieves dyspnea and fatigue, improves emotional function and enhances patients' control over their condition. These improvements are moderately large and clinically significant. Rehabilitation forms an important component of the management of COPD.

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

BACKGROUND

The co-administration of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists in a combined inhaler is intended to facilitate adherence to medication regimens, and to improve efficacy in COPD. In this review they are compared with mono component long-acting beta-agonists.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists preparations with mono component long-acting beta-agonists in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. The date of the most recent search is April 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were randomised and double-blind. Studies could compare a combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonist preparation with component long-acting beta-agonist preparation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes were exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia, with health-related quality of life (measured by validated scales), lung function and side-effects as secondary outcomes. Dichotomous data were analysed as fixed effect odds ratios (OR), and continuous data as mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sensitivity analysis was performed by combining data with a random effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies of good methodological quality met the inclusion criteria, randomising 7598 participants with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Eight studies assessed fluticasone/salmeterol, and two studies budesonide/formoterol. The exacerbation rates with combined inhalers were reduced in comparison to long-acting beta-agonists alone (Rate Ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.88). There was no significant difference in mortality between combined inhalers and long-acting beta-agonists alone. Pneumonia occurred more commonly with combined inhalers (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.35 to 1.94). There was no significant difference in terms of hospitalisations, although the two studies contributing data to this outcome may have been drawn from differing populations. Combination was more effective than LABA in improving quality of life measured by the St George Respiratory Questionnaire, and the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, and predose and post dose FEV1.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination therapy was more effective than long-acting beta-agonists in reducing exacerbation rates, although the evidence for the effects on hospitalisations was mixed, and requires further exploration. No significant impact on mortality was found even with additional information from the TORCH trial. The superiority of combination inhalers should be viewed against the increased risk of side-effects, particularly pneumonia. Additional studies on BDF are required and more information would be useful of the relative benefits and adverse event rates with different doses of inhaled corticosteroids.

Combined corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist in one inhaler versus placebo for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids have both been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Their co-administration in a combined inhaler may facilitate adherence to medication regimens, and improve efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of combined inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist preparations, compared to placebo, in the treatment of adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. The date of the most recent search is April 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were randomised and double-blind. Studies could compare any combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonist preparation with placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. One author entered the data.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria (6427 participants randomised). Two different combination preparations (fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol) were used. Study quality was good. Fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol both reduced the rate of exacerbations. Pooled analysis of both combination therapies indicated that exacerbations were less frequent when compared with placebo, Rate Ratio: 0.74 (95% CI 0.7 to 0.8). The clinical impact of this effect depends on the frequency of exacerbations experienced by patients. The patients included in these trials had on average 1-2 exacerbations per year which means that treatment with combination therapy would lead to a reduction of one exacerbation every two to four years in these individuals. There is an overall reduction in mortality, but this outcome is dominated by the results of TORCH and further studies on budesonide/formoterol are required. The three year number needed to treat to prevent one extra death is 36 (95% CI 21 to 258), using a baseline risk of 15.2% from the placebo arm of TORCH. Both treatments led to statistically significant improvement in health status measurements, although the clinical importance of the differences observed is open to interpretation. Symptoms and lung function assessments favoured combination treatments. There was an increase in the risk of pneumonia with combined inhalers. The three year number needed to treat for one extra case of pneumonia is 13 (95% CI 9 to 20), using a baseline risk of 12.3% from the placebo arm of TORCH. Fewer participants withdrew from studies assessing combined inhalers due to adverse events and lack of efficacy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, combination therapy led to a significant reduction of a quarter in exacerbation rates. There was a significant reduction in all-cause mortality with the addition of data from the TORCH trial. The increased risk of pneumonia is a concern, and better reporting of this outcome in future studies would be helpful. In order to draw firmer conclusions about the effects of combination therapy in a single inhaler more data are necessary, particularly in relation to the profile of adverse events and benefits in relation to different doses of inhaled corticosteroids.

Combined corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist in one inhaler versus inhaled steroids for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids have both been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Their co-administration in a combined inhaler is intended to facilitate adherence to medication regimens, and to improve efficacy. Two preparations are currently available, fluticasone/salmeterol (FPS) and budesonide/formoterol (BDF).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of combined inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist preparations, compared to inhaled corticosteroids, in the treatment of adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. The date of the most recent search is April 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were randomised and double-blind. Studies compared combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonist preparations with the inhaled corticosteroid component.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcome were exacerbations, mortality and pneumonia. Health-related quality of life (measured by validated scales), lung function and side-effects were secondary outcomes. Dichotomous data were analysed as fixed effect odds ratios (OR), and continuous data as mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies of good methodological quality met the inclusion criteria randomising 5708 participants with predominantly poorly reversible, severe COPD. Exacerbation rates were significantly reduced with combination therapies (Rate ratio 0.91; 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 0.97, P = 0.0008). Data from two FPS studies indicated that exacerbations requiring oral steroids were reduced with combination therapy. Data from one large study suggest that there is no significant difference in the rate of hospitalisations. Mortality was also lower with combined treatment (odds ratio 0.77; 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 0.94). Quality of life, lung function and withdrawals due to lack of efficacy favoured combination treatment. Adverse event profiles were similar between the two treatments. No significant differences were found between FPS and BDP in the primary outcomes, but the confidence intervals for the BDP results were wide as smaller numbers of patients have been studied.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination ICS and LABA significantly reduces morbidity and mortality in COPD when compared with mono component steroid. Adverse events were not significantly different between treatments, although evidence from other sources indicates that inhaled corticosteroids are associated with increased risk of pneumonia. Assessment of BDF in larger, long-term trials is required. Dose response data would provide valuable evidence on whether efficacy and safety outcomes are affected by different steroid loads.

Fluticasone versus beclomethasone or budesonide for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) and budesonide (BUD) are commonly prescribed inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of asthma. Fluticasone propionate (FP) is newer agent with greater potency in in-vitro assays.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of Fluticasone to Beclomethasone or Budesonide in the treatment of chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trial register (January 2007) and reference lists of articles. We contacted trialists and pharmaceutical companies for additional studies and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997 to 2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing Fluticasone to either Beclomethasone or Budesonide in the treatment of chronic asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality. One reviewer extracted data. Quantitative analyses were undertaken using RevMan analyses 1.0.1.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-one studies (14,602 participants) representing 74 randomised comparisons met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was fair. Dose ratio 1:2: FP produced a significantly greater end of treatment FEV1 (0.04 litres (95% CI 0 to 0.07 litres), end of treatment and change in morning PEF, but not change in FEV1 or evening PEF. This applied to all drug doses, age groups, and delivery devices. No difference between FP and BDP/BUD were seen for trial withdrawals. FP led to fewer symptoms and less rescue medication use. When given at half the dose of BDP/BUD, FP led to a greater likelihood of pharyngitis. There was no difference in the likelihood of oral candidiasis. Plasma cortisol and 24 hour urinary cortisol was measured frequently but data presentation was limited. Dose ratio 1:1: FP produced a statistically significant difference in morning PEF, evening PEF, and FEV1 over BDP or BUD. The effects on exacerbations were mixed. There were no significant differences incidence of hoarseness, pharyngitis, candidiasis, or cough.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Fluticasone given at half the daily dose of beclomethasone or budesonide leads to small improvements in measures of airway calibre, but it appears to have a higher risk of causing sore throat and when given at the same daily dose leads to increased hoarseness. There are concerns about adrenal suppression with Fluticasone given to children at doses greater than 400 mcg/day, but the randomised trials included in this review did not provide sufficient data to address this issue.

Long-acting beta2-agonists versus theophylline for maintenance treatment of asthma

BACKGROUND

Theophylline and long acting beta-2 agonists are bronchodilators used for the management of persistent asthma symptoms, especially nocturnal asthma. They represent different classes of drug with differing side-effect profiles.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy, safety and side-effects of long-acting beta-2 agonists and theophylline in the maintenance treatment of adults and adolescents with asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register and reference lists of articles. We also contacted authors of identified RCTs for other relevant published and unpublished studies and pharmaceutical manufacturers. Most recent search: November 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All included studies were RCTs involving adults and children with clinical evidence of asthma. These studies must have compared oral sustained release and/or dose adjusted theophylline with an inhaled long-acting beta-2 agonist.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In original review, two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data, similarly in this update two reviewers undertook this. Study authors were contacted for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies with a total of 1344 participants met the inclusion criteria of the review. They were of varying quality. There was no significant difference between salmeterol and theophylline in FEV(1) predicted (6.5%; 95% CI -0.84 to 13.83). However, salmeterol treatment led to significantly better morning PEF (mean difference 16.71 L/min, 95% CI 8.91 to 24.51) and evening PEF (mean difference 15.58 L/min, 95% CI 8.33 to 22.83). Salmeterol also reduced the use of rescue medication. Formoterol, used in two studies was reported to be as effective as theophylline. Bitolterol, used in only one study, was reported to be less effective than theophylline. Participants taking salmeterol experienced fewer adverse events than those using theophylline (Parallel studies: Relative Risk 0.44; 95% CI 0.30 to 0.63, Risk Difference -0.11; 95% CI -0.16 to -0.07, Numbers Needed to Treat (NNT) 9; 95% CI 6 to 14). Significant reductions were reported for central nervous system adverse events (Relative Risk 0.50; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.86, Risk Difference -0.07; 95% CI -0.12 to -0.02, NNT 14; 95% CI 8 to 50) and gastrointestinal adverse events (Relative Risk 0.30; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.55, Risk Difference -0.11; 95% CI -0.16 to -0.06, NNT 9; 95% CI 6 to 16).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Long-acting beta-2 agonists, particularly salmeterol, are more effective than theophylline in improving morning and evening PEF, but are not significantly different in their effect on FEV1. There is evidence of decreased daytime and nighttime short-acting beta-2 agonist requirement with salmeterol. Fewer adverse events occurred in participants using long-acting beta-2 agonists (salmeterol and formoterol) as compared to theophylline.

Inhaled corticosteroids compared to placebo for prevention of exercise induced bronchoconstriction

BACKGROUND

The pathogenesis of exercise induced bronchoconstriction is likely multifactorial and is not completely understood. Inflammation plays an important role in the pathogenesis of exercise induced bronchoconstriction in asthmatic subjects but the evidence seems less strong in non-asthmatic subjects. The management of exercise induced bronchoconstriction focuses on prevention, through both pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this review were to evaluate the use of inhaled corticosteroids in the treatment of exercise induced bronchoconstriction in a systematic way. Specifically, the review was designed to: determine whether inhaled corticosteroids (compared to placebo) has an attenuating effect on exercise induced bronchoconstriction in adult and pediatric asthmatic patients; estimate the magnitude of the attenuating effect.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Review Group Specialised Register of trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, review articles, textbooks and reference list of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in adults or children comparing inhaled corticosteroids with placebo to prevent bronchoconstriction in patients with exercise induced bronchoconstriction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality assessment and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

The results from six randomised controlled trials involving 123 participants were analyzed (two trials involving adults and four involving children). Combining results from the two parallel studies with at least 4 weeks duration of inhaled corticosteroids, the use of inhaled corticosteroids significantly attenuated the percent fall index in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (WMD = 14.07%; 95% CI: 11.62% to 16.52%). The result from one crossover study with duration of inhaled corticosteroids of 4 weeks revealed significant attenuation of percent fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 second ( WMD = 6.90%; 95% CI: 1.40% to 12.40%) and the percent fall in peak expiratory flow ( WMD =11.50%; 95% CI: 6.31% to 16.69%). The small amount of data from placebo-controlled trials using a single treatment do not currently allow conclusions to be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled corticosteroids used for 4 weeks or more before exercise testing significantly attenuated exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. The relative benefits of inhaled corticosteroids compared to other forms of exercise induced bronchoconstriction treatment (sodium cromoglycate, nedocromil sodium, salbutamol, and other anti-inflammatory agents) remains unclear.

Education interventions for adults who attend the emergency room for acute asthma

BACKGROUND

The use of educational and behavioural interventions in the management of chronic asthma have a strong evidence base. There may be a role for educative interventions following presentation in an emergency setting in adults.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of educational interventions administered following an acute exacerbation of asthma leading to presentation in the emergency department.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trials register. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Searches are current to November 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, parallel group trials were eligible if they recruited adults (> 17 years) who had presented at an emergency department with an acute asthma exacerbation. The intervention of interest was any educational intervention (for example, written asthma management plan).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies involving 1954 adults were included. Education significantly reduced subsequent admission to hospital (relative risk 0.50; 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.91); however, did not significantly reduce the risk of re-presentation at emergency departments (ED) the study follow up (relative risk 0.69; 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 1.21). The lack of statistically significant differences between asthma education and control groups in terms of peak flow, quality of life, study withdrawal and days lost were hard to interpret given the low number of studies contributing to these outcomes. One study from the early 1990s measured cost and found no difference for total costs and costs related to physician visits and admissions to hospital. If data were restricted to emergency department treatment, education led to lower costs than control.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found that educational interventions applied in the emergency department reduce subsequent asthma admissions to hospital. The interventions did not significantly reduce ED re-presentations; while the trend in effect favours educational interventions, the pooled results were not statistically significant. The impact of educational intervention in this context on longer term outcomes relating to asthma morbidity is unclear. Priorities for additional research in this area include assessment of health-related quality of life, lung function assessment, exploration of the relationship between socio-economic status and asthma morbidity, and better description of the intervention assessed.

Tailored interventions based on sputum eosinophils versus clinical symptoms for asthma in children and adults

BACKGROUND

Asthma severity and control can be measured both subjectively and objectively. Sputum analysis for evaluation of percentage of sputum eosinophilia directly measures airway inflammation, and is one method of objectively monitoring asthma. Interventions for asthma therapies have been traditionally based on symptoms and spirometry.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of tailoring asthma interventions based on sputum analysis in comparison to clinical symptoms (with or without spirometry/peak flow) for asthma related outcomes in children and adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and reference lists of articles. The last search was on 31 October 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled comparisons of adjustment of asthma therapy based on sputum eosinophils compared to traditional methods (primarily clinical symptoms and spirometry/peak flow).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Results of searches were reviewed against pre-determined criteria for inclusion. Three sets of reviewers selected relevant studies. Two review authors independently assessed trial quality extracted data. Authors were contacted for further information but none were received. Data was analysed as "treatment received" and sensitivity analyses performed.

MAIN RESULTS

Three adult studies were included; these studies were clinically and methodologically heterogenous (use of medications, cut off for percentage of sputum eosinophils and definition of asthma exacerbation). There were no eligible paediatric studies. Of 246 participants randomised, 221 completed the trials. In the meta-analysis, a significant reduction in number of participants who had one or more asthma exacerbations occurred when treatment was based on sputum eosinophils in comparison to clinical symptoms; pooled odds ratio (OR) was 0.49 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.87); number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) was 6 (95% CI 4 to 32). There were also differences between groups in the rate of exacerbation (any exacerbation per year) and severity of exacerbations defined by requirement for use of oral corticosteroids but the reduction in hospitalisations was not statistically significant. Data for clinical symptoms, quality of life and spirometry were not significantly different between groups. The mean dose of inhaled corticosteroids per day was similar in both groups and no adverse events were reported. However sputum induction was not always possible.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tailored asthma interventions based on sputum eosinophils is beneficial in reducing the frequency of asthma exacerbations in adults with asthma. This review supports the use of sputum eosinophils to tailor asthma therapy for adults with frequent exacerbations and severe asthma. Further studies need to be undertaken to strengthen these results and no conclusion can be drawn for children with asthma.

Inhaled corticosteroids for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been the subject of much controversy. Major international guidelines recommend selective use of ICS. Recently published meta-analyses have reported conflicting findings on the effects of inhaled steroid therapy in COPD.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the review is to determine the efficacy of regular use of inhaled corticosteroids in patients with stable COPD.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A pre-defined search strategy was used to search the Cochrane Airways Group specialised register for relevant literature. Searches are current as of October 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised trials comparing any dose of any type of inhaled steroid with a placebo control in patients with COPD. Acute bronchodilator reversibility to short term beta2-agonists and bronchial hyperresponsiveness were not exclusion criteria. The a priori primary outcome was change in lung function. Data on mortality, exacerbations, quality of life and symptoms, rescue bronchodilator use, exercise capacity, biomarkers and safety were also analysed.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Adverse effects information was collected from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven primary studies with 13,139 participants met the inclusion criteria. Medium term use of ICS (> two months and up to six months) resulted in a small improvement in FEV1 in some studies. Long term use of ICS (> six months) did not significantly reduce the rate of decline in FEV1 in COPD patients (weighted mean difference (WMD) 5.80 ml/year with ICS over placebo, 95% CI -0.28 to 11.88, 2333 participants). There was no statistically significant effect on mortality in COPD patients (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.16, 8390 participants). Long term use of ICS reduced the mean rate of exacerbations in those studies where pooling of data was possible (WMD -0.26 exacerbations per patient per year, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.14, 2586 participants). ICS slowed the rate of decline in quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (WMD -1.22 units/year, 95% CI -1.83 to -0.60, 2507 participants). Response to ICS was not predicted by oral steroid response, bronchodilator reversibility or bronchial hyper-responsiveness in COPD patients. There was an increased risk of oropharyngeal candidiasis (OR 2.49, 95% CI 1.78 to 3.49, 4380 participants) and hoarseness. The few long term studies that measured bone effects generally showed no major effect on fractures and bone mineral density over 3 years.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Patients and clinicians should balance the potential benefits of inhaled steroids in COPD (reduced rate of exacerbations, reduced rate of decline in quality of life), against the known increase in local side effects (oropharyngeal candidiasis and hoarseness). The risk of long term adverse effects is unknown.

Long-acting beta2-agonists for chronic asthma in adults and children where background therapy contains varied or no inhaled corticosteroid

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common respiratory disease among both adults and children and short acting inhaled beta-2 agonists are used widely for 'reliever' bronchodilator therapy. Long acting beta-2 agonists (LABA) were introduced as prospective 'symptom controllers' in addition to inhaled corticosteroid 'preventer' therapy (ICS). In this updated review we have included studies in which patients were either not on ICS as a group, or in which some patients, but not all, were on ICS to complement previous systematic reviews of studies where LABA was given in patients uniformly receiving ICS. We have focussed particularly on serious adverse events, given previous concerns about potential risks, especially of death, from regular beta-2 agonist use.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to determine the benefit or detriment on the primary outcome of asthma control with the regular use of LABA compared with placebo, in mixed populations in which only some were taking ICS and in populations not using ICS therapy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We carried out searches using the Cochrane Airways Group trial register, most recently in October 2005. We searched bibliographies of identified RCTs for additional relevant RCTs and contacted authors of identified RCTs for other published and unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised studies of at least four weeks duration, comparing a LABA given twice daily with a placebo, in chronic asthma. Selection criteria to this updated review have been altered to accommodate recently published Cochrane reviews on combination and addition of LABA to ICS therapy. Studies in which all individuals were uniformly taking ICS were excluded from this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers performed data extraction and study quality assessment independently. We contacted authors of studies for missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies (representing 68 experimental comparisons) randomising 42,333 participants met the inclusion criteria. Salmeterol was used as long-acting agent in 50 studies and formoterol fumarate in 17. The treatment period was four to nine weeks in 29 studies, and 12 to 52 weeks in 38 studies. Twenty-four studies did not permit the use of ICS, and forty permitted either inhaled corticosteroid or cromones (in three studies this was unclear). In these studies between 22% and 92% were taking ICS, with a median of 62%. There were significant advantages to LABA treatment compared to placebo for a variety of measurements of airway calibre including morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), evening PEF and FEV1. They were associated with significantly fewer symptoms, less use of rescue medication and higher quality of life scores. This was true whether patients were taking LABA in combination with ICS or not. Findings from SMART (a recently published surveillance study) indicated significant increases in asthma related deaths, respiratory related deaths and combined asthma related deaths and life threatening experiences. The absolute increase in asthma-related mortality was consistent with an increase of around one per 1250 patients treated with LABA for six months, but the confidence intervals are wide (from 700 to 10,000). Post-hoc exploratory subgroups suggested that African-Americans and those not on inhaled corticosteroids were at particular risk for the primary end-point of death or life-threatening asthma event. There was also a suggestion of an increase in exacerbation rate in children. Pharmacologically predicted side effects such as headache, throat irritation, tremor and nervousness were more frequent with LABA treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

LABA are effective in the control of chronic asthma in the "real-life" subject groups included. However there are potential safety issues which call into question the safety of LABA, particularly in those asthmatics who are not taking ICS, and it is not clear why African-Americans were found to have significant differences in comparison to Caucasians for combined respiratory-related death and life threatening experiences, but not for asthma-related death.

Long-acting beta2-agonists versus anti-leukotrienes as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Patients who continue to experience asthma symptoms despite taking regular inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) represent a management challenge. Leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRA) and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABA) agents may both be considered as add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).

OBJECTIVES

We compared the efficacy and safety profile of adding either daily LABA or LTRA in asthmatic patients who remained symptomatic on ICS.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register was searched for randomised controlled trials up to and including March 2006. Reference lists of all included studies and reviews were screened to identify potentially relevant citations. Inquiries regarding other published or unpublished studies supported by the authors of the included studies or pharmaceutical companies who manufacture these agents were made. Conference proceedings of major respiratory meetings were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials conducted in adults or children with recurrent asthma where a LABA (for example, salmeterol or formoterol) or LTRA (for example, montelukast, pranlukast, zafirlukast) was added to ICS for a minimum of 28 days were considered for inclusion. Inhaled short-acting beta(2)-agonists and short courses of oral steroids were permitted as rescue medications. Other daily asthma treatments were permitted, providing the dose remained constant during the intervention period. Two reviewers independently reviewed the literature searches.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and trial quality assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers. Whenever possible, primary study authors were requested to confirm methodology and data extraction and to provide additional information and clarification when needed. Where necessary, expansion of graphic reproductions and estimation from other data presented in the paper was performed.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria; eleven trials including 6,030 participants provided data in sufficient detail to permit aggregation. All eleven trials pertained to adults with moderate airway obstruction (% predicted FEV(1) 66-76%) at baseline. Montelukast (n=9) or Zafirlukast (n=2) was compared to Salmeterol (n=9) or Formoterol (n=2) as add-on therapy to 400-565 mcg of beclomethasone or equivalent. Risk of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids was significantly lower with LABA+ICS when compared to LTRA+ICS (RR= 0.83, 95% Confidence Interval (95%CI): 0.71, 0.97): the number needed to treat with LABA compared to LTRA, to prevent one exacerbation over 48 weeks, was 38 (95% CI: 23 to 247). The following outcomes also improved significantly with the addition of LABA compared to LTRA to inhaled steroids (Weighted Mean Difference; 95%CI): morning PEFR (16 L/min; 13 to 18), evening PEFR (12 L/min; 9 to 15), FEV(1) (80 mL; 60 to 100), rescue-free days (9%; 5% to 13%), symptom-free days (6%; 2 to 11), rescue beta(2)-agonists (-0.5 puffs/day; -0.2 to -1), quality of life (0.1; 0.05 to 0.2), symptom score (Standard Mean Difference -0.2; -0.1 to -0.3), night awakenings (-0.1/week; -0.06 to -0.2) and patient satisfaction (RR 1.12; 1.07 to 1.16). Risk of withdrawals due to any reason was significantly lower with LABA+ICS compared to LTRA+ICS (Risk Ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.95). Withdrawals due to adverse events or due to poor asthma control, hospitalisation, osteopenia, serious adverse events, overall adverse events, headache or cardiovascular events were not significantly different between the two study groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In asthmatic adults inadequately controlled on low doses of inhaled steroids, the addition of LABA is superior to LTRA for preventing exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, and for improving lung function, symptoms, and the use of rescue beta(2)-agonists.

Lung volume reduction surgery for diffuse emphysema

BACKGROUND

Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been re-introduced for treating patients with severe diffuse emphysema. It is a procedure that aims to improve long-term daily functioning, although it is costly and may also be associated with a high risk of mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To assemble evidence from randomised controlled trials for the effectiveness of LVRS, and identify optimal surgical techniques.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised controlled trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) register. Searches are current to September 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that studied the safety and efficacy of LVRS in patients with diffuse emphysema were included. Studies were excluded if they investigated giant or bullous emphysema.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent review authors assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data. Where possible, data from more than one study were combined using RevMan 4.2 software.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies (1663 participants) met the entry criteria of the review. One study accounted for 73% of the participants recruited. Study quality was high, although blinding in studies was not possible. Ninety day mortality was significantly greater in all those who underwent LVRS (odds ratio 6.57 (95% CI 3.34 to 12.95), four studies, N = 1415). A subgroup analysis by risk status suggested that there was a subgroup of participants who were consistently at a significant risk of death, although this was only measured in one large study. The ninety day mortality data indicated that death was more likely with LVRS irrespective of risk status identified in one large study. Improvements in lung function, quality of life and exercise capacity were more likely with LVRS than with usual follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence summarised in this review is drawn from one large study, and several smaller trials. The findings from the large study indicated that in patients who survive up to three months post-surgery, there were significantly better health status and lung function outcomes in favour of surgery compared with usual medical care. Patients identified post hoc as being of high risk of death from surgery were those with particularly impaired lung function and poor diffusing capacity and/or homogenous emphysema. Further research should address the effect of this intervention on exacerbations and rate of decline in lung function and health status.

Injectable vaccines for preventing pneumococcal infection in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

As chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) progresses, exacerbations can occur with increasing frequency. One goal of therapy in COPD is to try and prevent these exacerbations, thereby reducing disease morbidity and associated healthcare costs. Pneumococcal vaccinations are considered to be one strategy for reducing the risk of infective exacerbations.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the safety and efficacy of pneumococcal vaccination in COPD. The primary outcome assessed was acute exacerbations. Secondary outcomes of interest included episodes of pneumonia, hospital admissions, adverse events related to treatment, disability, change in lung function, mortality, and cost effectiveness.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group COPD trials register using pre-specified terms. We also conducted additional handsearches of conference abstracts. The last round of searches were performed in April 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of injectable pneumococcal vaccine in people with COPD were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and three review authors independently assessed trial quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Although 10 studies cited in 11 publications were identified that met the inclusion criteria for this review, only four of these provided data on participants with COPD. The studies which did provide data for this review consisted of two trials using a 14-valent vaccine, and two using a 23-valent injectable vaccine. Data for the primary outcome, acute exacerbation of COPD, was available from only one of the four studies. The odds ratio of 1.43 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 6.69) between interventions was not statistically significant. Of the secondary outcomes for which data were available and could be extracted, none reached statistical significance. Three studies provided dichotomous data for persons who developed pneumonia (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.37, n = 748). Rates of hospital admissions and emergency department visits came from a single study. There was no significant reduction in the odds of all-cause mortality 1 to 48 months post-vaccination (Peto odds ratio 0.94, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.33, n = 888), or for death from cardiorespiratory causes (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.66).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials that injectable pneumococcal vaccination in persons with COPD has a significant impact on morbidity or mortality. Further large randomised controlled trials would be needed to ascertain if the small benefits suggested by individual studies are real.

Gastro-oesophageal reflux treatment for prolonged non-specific cough in children and adults

BACKGROUND

Cough is a very common symptom presenting to medical practitioners. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is said to be the causative factor in up to 41% of adults with chronic cough. However cough and GORD are common ailments and their co-existence by chance is high. Also cough can induce reflux episodes. Treatment for GORD includes conservative measures (diet manipulation), pharmaceutical therapy (motility or prokinetic agents, H(2) antagonist and proton pump inhibitors (PPI)) and fundoplication.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of GORD treatment on chronic cough in children and adults with GORD and prolonged cough that is not related to an underlying respiratory disease i.e. non-specific chronic cough.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register Collaboration and Cochrane Airways Group, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, review articles and reference lists of relevant articles were searched. The date of last search was 7th April 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials on GORD treatment for cough in children and adults without primary lung disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Results of searches were reviewed against pre-determined criteria for inclusion. Two independent reviewers selected, extracted and assessed data for inclusion. Authors were contacted for further information. Data was analysed as "intention to treat" as well as "treatment received". Paediatric and adults data were considered separately. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies (3 paediatric, 10 adults) were included. Data from six were available for analysis. None of the paediatric studies could be included in meta-analysis. In adults, analysis on use of H(2) antagonist, motility agents and conservative treatment for GORD were not possible (from lack of data) and there were no controlled studies on fundoplication as an intervention. Six adult studies comparing PPI (2-3 months) to placebo were analysed for various outcomes in the meta-analysis. Enrolment of subjects for two studies were primarily from medical clinics and another 4 studies were otolaryngology clinic patients or patients with laryngitis. Using "intention to treat", pooled data from 4 studies resulted in no significant difference between treatment and placebo in total resolution of cough, Odds Ratio 0.46 (95% CI 0.19 to 1.15). Pooled data revealed no overall significant improvement in cough outcomes (end of trial or change in cough scores). Significant differences were only found in sensitivity analyses. A significant improvement in change of cough scores was found in end of intervention (2-3 months) in those receiving PPI with a standardised mean difference of -0.41 (95%CI -0.75, -0.07) using GIV analysis on cross over trials. Two studies reported improvement in cough after 5 days to 2 weeks of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to definitely conclude that GORD treatment with PPI is universally beneficial for cough associated with GORD in adults. The beneficial effect was only seen in sub-analysis and its effect was small. The optimal duration of such a trial of therapy to evaluate response could not be ascertained in the meta-analysis although two RCTs reported significant change by 2 weeks of therapy. Clinicians should be cognisant of a period (natural resolution with time) and placebo effect in studies that utilise cough as an outcome measure. Data in children are inconclusive. Future paediatric and adult studies are needed whereby studies should be double blind, randomised controlled, parallel design, using treatments for at least two months, with validated subjective and objective cough outcomes and include ascertainment of time to respond as well as assessment of acid and/or non acid reflux whilst on therapy.

Therapeutic interventions for Burkitt's lymphoma in children

BACKGROUND

Burkitt's lymphoma (BL) is a small non-cleaved cell lymphoma which commonly presents as jaw swellings. Uncertainty remains as to the most effective form of management.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence of any therapeutic strategy in the treatment of BL.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE (1966-March 2006), LILACS (1982-March 2006), EMBASE (1974-March 2006) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (all years, latest Issue 01/2006) to identify relevant trials. All of these references were accessed in order to identify additional trials in BL.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any duration were included. We included studies conducted in children with a confirmed diagnosis of BL. Studies were not restricted by geographical location or by language of publication. Any therapeutic intervention was considered. The primary outcome was overall survival.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed studies for relevance. Studies that met the entry criteria were assessed for study quality. Data were extracted independently and were entered into RevMan 4.2.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies met the entry criteria of the review but data could only be retrieved from ten. Inadequate reporting of study methodology was a common feature of the trials preventing thorough assessment of study quality. We were unable to pool data for any of the outcomes due to the differences between the interventions assessed in the studies. Seven studies aimed to induce remission: Overall survival did not differ significantly between treatment groups in three out of four studies reporting this outcome. Five studies aimed to maintain remission: In two out of three studies reporting survival, it was substantially, but not statistically significantly, different between treatment groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review does not currently provide any strong evidence on the relative effectiveness of interventions to treat Burkitt's lymphoma. The studies that have been conducted to date are small, underpowered and prone to both systematic and random error.

Pulmonary rehabilitation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

The widespread application of pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) should be preceded by demonstrable improvements in function attributable to the programs. This review updates that reported in 2001.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of rehabilitation on health-related quality of life (QoL) and exercise capacity in patients with COPD.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We identified additional RCTs from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register. Searches were current as of July 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs of rehabilitation in patients with COPD in which quality of life (QoL) and/or functional (FEC) or maximal (MEC) exercise capacity were measured. Rehabilitation was defined as exercise training for at least four weeks with or without education and/or psychological support. Control groups received conventional community care without rehabilitation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) using a random-effects model. We requested missing data from the authors of the primary study.

MAIN RESULTS

We included the 23 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the 2001 Cochrane review. Eight additional RCTs (for a total of 31) met the inclusion criteria. We found statistically significant improvements for all the outcomes. In four important domains of QoL (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire scores for Dyspnea, Fatigue, Emotional function and Mastery), the effect was larger than the minimal clinically important difference of 0.5 units (for example: Dyspnoea score: WMD 1.0 units; 95% confidence interval: 0.8 to 1.3 units; n = 12 trials). Statistically significant improvements were noted in two of the three domains of the St. Georges Respiratory Questionnaire. For FEC and MEC, the effect was small and slightly below the threshold of clinical significance for the six-minute walking distance (WMD: 48 meters; 95% CI: 32 to 65; n = 16 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation relieves dyspnea and fatigue, improves emotional function and enhances patients' sense of control over their condition. These improvements are moderately large and clinically significant. Rehabilitation forms an important component of the management of COPD.

Ipratropium bromide versus long-acting beta-2 agonists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a condition associated with high morbidity, mortality and cost to the community. Patients often report symptomatic improvement with long acting beta-2 agonists (LABAs) and anticholinergic bronchodilator medications, both of which are recommended in COPD guidelines. These medications have different mechanisms of action and therefore theoretically could have an additive effect when combined. As these medications are prescribed in COPD as long term therapy, it is important to assemble reliable evidence on their relative and additive effects.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative efficacy and safety of regular long term use (at least four weeks) of ipratropium bromide and LABA in patients with stable COPD. Comparisons were made between single agents and in combination versus LABAs alone.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials (August 2005) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted drug companies for relevant trial data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing treatment for at least four weeks with an anticholinergic agent (ipratropium bromide) alone or in combination with LABA versus LABA alone, delivered via metered dose inhaler or nebuliser, in non-asthmatic adult subjects with stable COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently performed data extraction and study quality assessment. We contacted study authors and pharmaceutical companies for missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies met the inclusion criteria of the review (2652 participants). Monotherapy comparison (six studies): There was a significantly greater change in favour of salmeterol in morning PEF and FEV1. There were no significant differences in quality of life, exacerbations, or symptoms. Formoterol appeared to confer some benefits over ipratropium treatment in terms of morning peak flow. Combination comparison (three studies): There was a significant improvement in post-bronchodilator lung function, supplemental short-acting beta-agonist use and HRQL in favour of combination therapy compared with salmeterol alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data from the trials suggest that there is little difference between regular long term use of IpB alone and salmeterol if the aim is to improve COPD symptoms and exercise tolerance. However, salmeterol was more effective in improving lung function variables. In terms of post-bronchodilator lung function, combination therapy conferred modest benefits and a significant improvement in HRQL, and reduced supplemental short-acting beta-agonist requirement, although this effect was not consistent. Additional studies are needed to assess the relative effects of combining therapies, using validated subjective measurements, and should consider concordance and the convenience of people having to use different inhaler devices.

Continuous positive airways pressure for obstructive sleep apnoea in adults

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnoea is the periodic reduction (hypopnoea) or cessation (apnoea) of breathing due to narrowing or occlusion of the upper airway during sleep. The main symptom is daytime sleepiness and it has been suggested it is linked to premature death, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, stroke and road traffic accidents.

OBJECTIVES

The main treatment for sleep apnoea is with the use of continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP), which requires a flow generator and mask. These are used at night to prevent apnoea, hypoxia and sleep disturbance. The objective was to assess the effects of CPAP in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register and reference lists of articles. We consulted experts in the field. Searches were current to July 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing nocturnal CPAP with an inactive control or oral appliances in adults with obstructive sleep apnoea (an apnoea and hypopnoea index greater than five per hour). Trials had a minimum intervention period of two weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed and two review authors extracted data independently. Study authors were contacted for missing information. Parallel and crossover group trials were analysed separately.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-six trials involving 1718 people met the inclusion criteria. Study quality was mixed. Compared with control, CPAP showed significant improvements in certain objective and subjective sleepiness, measures of quality of life and cognitive function (parallel-group studies: Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) -3.83 units, 95% CI -4.57 to -3.09; crossover studies: ESS -1.84 units, 95% CI -2.57 to -1.11). Twenty-four hour systolic and diastolic blood pressures were lower with CPAP compared with control (parallel-group trials). Compared with oral appliances, CPAP significantly reduced the apnoea and hypopnoea index (crossover studies: -7.97 events/hr, 95% CI -9.56 to -6.38) and improved sleep efficiency (crossover studies: 2.31%, 95% CI 0.02 to 4.6) and minimum oxygen saturation (4.14%, 95% CI 3.25 to 5.03). Responders to both treatments expressed a strong preference for the oral appliance. However, participants were more likely to withdraw on OA than on CPAP therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CPAP is effective in reducing symptoms of sleepiness and improving quality of life measures in people with moderate and severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). It is more effective than oral appliances in reducing respiratory disturbances in these people but subjective outcomes are more equivocal. Certain people tend to prefer oral appliances to CPAP where both are effective. This could be because they offer a more convenient way of controlling OSA. Short-term data indicate that CPAP leads to lower blood pressure than control. Long-term data are required for all outcomes in order to determine whether the initial benefits seen in short-term clinical trials persist.

Long-acting beta2-agonists for poorly reversible chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterised by partially reversible airflow limitation. Many patients have little reversibility to short acting bronchodilators, but long acting bronchodilators are frequently advocated.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of long acting beta-2 adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) in COPD patients demonstrating poor reversibility to short-acting bronchodilators.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register was searched ('all years' to 2005) along with the reference lists from identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs comparing inhaled LABAs (salmeterol or formoterol) with placebo in the treatment of patients with stable, poorly reversible COPD. Studies were a minimum of four weeks in duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently performed data extraction and study quality assessment. If we required additional data, we contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies sponsoring the identified RCTs.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three published and unpublished studies (6061 participants) were included in the review. There was a significant change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) in favour of salmeterol 50 mcg twice daily (BID) of 51 mls (95% confidence intervals (CI) 32 to 70), end of study morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) 14.89 L/min (95% CI 10.86 to 18.91). Supplemental short-acting bronchodilator usage was reduced by just under one puff per day. There were significant differences in the total, activity and impact domain scores of the St George's respiratory questionnaire in favour of salmeterol 50 mcg BID. Findings from other health status measurements and symptom scores were conflicting. There was no significant difference in exercise tolerance. The number of participants experiencing exacerbations was significantly reduced with salmeterol 50 mcg treatment compared with placebo (numbers needed to treat to benefit 21).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that the treatment of patients with COPD with salmeterol 50 mcg produces modest increases in lung function. There were varying effects for other important outcomes such as health related quality of life or reduction in symptoms. However, there was a consistent reduction in exacerbations which may help people with COPD who suffer frequent deterioration of symptoms prompting healthcare utilisation. The strength of evidence for the use of salmeterol 100 mcg, formoterol 12 mcg, 18 mcg, 24 mcg was insufficient to provide clear indications for practice.

Anti-IgE for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Omalizumab is a recombinant humanised monoclonal antibody directed against immunoglobulin E (anti-IgE) to inhibit the immune system's response to allergen exposure. Omalizumab is directed against the binding site of IgE for its high affinity Fc receptor. It prevents free serum IgE from attaching to mast cells and other effector cells and prevents IgE mediated inflammatory changes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of anti-IgE compared with placebo in patients with allergic asthma

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Asthma trials register for potentially relevant studies (February 2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials examining anti-IgE administered in any manner for any duration. Trials with co-interventions were included as long as they were the same in each arm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and extracted and entered data. Three modes of administration were identified from the published literature (inhaled, intravenous and subcutaneous injection). Subgroup analysis was performed by asthma severity. Data were extracted from published and unpublished sources.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen trials (15 group comparisons) were included in the review, contributing a total of 3143 mild to severe allergic asthmatic participants with high levels of IgE. Treatment with intravenous and subcutaneous Omalizumab significantly reduced free IgE compared with placebo. Omalizumab led to a significant reduction in inhaled steroid (ICS) consumption compared with placebo (-119 mcg/day (95% CI -154 to -83, three trials)). There were significant increases in the number of participants who were able to reduce ICS by over 50% (odds ratio (OR) 2.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.02 to 3.10 (four trials)); or completely withdraw their daily ICS intake (OR 2.50 (95%CI 2.00 to 3.13; four trials)). Participants treated with Omalizumab were less likely to suffer an asthma exacerbation with treatment as an adjunct to ICS (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.41 to 0.65, five trials), or as an ICS tapering agent (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.60, four trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Omalizumab was significantly more effective than placebo at increasing the numbers of patients who were able to reduce or withdraw their inhaled steroids, but the clinical value of the reduction in steroid consumption has be considered in the light of the high cost of Omalizumab. The impressive placebo effects observed in control groups bring into question the true effect of Omalizumab. Omalizumab was effective in reducing asthma exacerbations as an adjunctive therapy to inhaled steroids, and during steroid tapering phases of clinical trials. Omalizumab was generally well tolerated, although there were more injection site reactions with Omalizumab. Patient and physician assessments of the drug were positive. Further assessment in paediatric populations is necessary, as is direct double-dummy comparison with ICS.

Fluticasone versus HFA-beclomethasone dipropionate for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy of fluticasone (FP) and beclomethasone (BDP) propelled with CFCs has been well established. The potency of HFA-BDP is thought to have been improved with new propellant and some studies suggest that it may equipotent at half the dose of CFC propelled-BDP. There is a need to revisit this question in the light of a potentially more potent new non-CFC propellant.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative efficacy of FP and HFA-propelled BDP in chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register was searched using pre-specified terms. Searches were current as of January 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were eligible for inclusion in the review. We compared either CFC or HFA-propelled FP with HFA-propelled BDP. We made a distinction between HFA-BDP and HFA-BDP extra fine, which dispenses smaller particles of drug, leading to different, usually more peripheral distribution in the airways. Any inhaler device was considered, and there was no restriction on studies with or without spacers. We included studies which assessed HFA-BDP given via either pMDI, breath-actuated MDI, or DPI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review. Data were extracted and entered in to RevMan 4.2 using standard meta-analytical techniques with predefined criteria for exploring statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight studies (1260 participants) met the inclusion criteria of the review. One study was conducted in children. Study reporting quality was fair, but all studies were of short duration (three to twelve weeks). Only studies assessing HFA-BDP extra fine in comparison with FP were identified. Lung function was not significantly different between extra fine BDP and FP when compared at the same dose in parallel studies, change in FEV1: 0.04 litres (95% CI -0.03 to 0.11 litres; three studies, 659 adults); change in am PEF: -0.69 litres (95% CI -11.21 to 9.83 litres; two studies, 364 adults). Individual studies reported non-significant findings in symptom scores and quality of life questionnaires. There was no significant difference between FP and HFA-BDP in the risk of study withdrawal, dysphonia or when data were reported as any adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference between FP and extra fine HFA-BDP on FEV(1) or peak flow at a dose ratio of 1:1. However, the number of studies and width of the confidence intervals in the analyses do not exclude a clinically meaningful difference between these two drugs. Difficulty in the successful manipulation of the devices studied may be a barrier to the widespread use of MDIs. One paediatric study was included in the review, so extrapolation of the findings of this review to children is limited. Further longer term studies in adults and children with moderate and severe asthma are required.

Ipratropium bromide versus short acting beta-2 agonists for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a condition associated with high morbidity, mortality and cost to the community. Patients often report symptomatic improvement with short-acting beta-2 agonists (SABA) and anticholinergic bronchodilator medications, and both are recommended in COPD guidelines. These medications have different mechanisms of action and therefore could have an additive effect when combined.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the relative efficacy and safety of regular long term use (at least four weeks) of ipratropium bromide and short- acting beta-2 agonist therapy in patients with stable COPD.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials was searched. Bibliographies were checked to identify relevant cross-references. Drug companies were contacted for relevant trial data. The searches are current to August 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing at least 4 weeks of treatment with an anticholinergic agent (ipratropium bromide) alone or in combination with a beta-2 agonist (short acting) versus the beta-2 agonist alone, delivered via metered dose inhaler or nebuliser, in non-asthmatic adult subjects with stable COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction and study quality assessment was performed independently by three reviewers. Authors of studies and relevant manufacturers were contacted if data were missing.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies (3912 participants) met the inclusion criteria of the review. Small benefits of ipratropium over a short-acting beta-2 agonist were demonstrated on lung function outcomes. There were small benefits in favour of ipratropium on quality of life (HRQL), as well as a reduction in the requirement for oral steroids. Combination therapy with ipratropium plus a short-acting beta-2 agonist conferred benefits over a short-acting beta-2 agonist alone in terms of post-bronchodilator lung function. There was no significant benefit of combination therapy in subjective improvements in HRQL, but again there was a reduction in the requirement for oral steroids.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available data from the trials included in this review suggest that the advantage of regular long term use of ipratropium alone or in combination with a short-acting beta-2 agonist or over a beta-2 agonist alone are small, if the aim is to improve lung function, symptoms and exercise tolerance. Until further data are available, the strategy of providing a short-acting beta-2 agonist on a PRN basis, and then either continuing with the short-acting beta-2 agonist regularly or conducting an "n of 1" trial of regular beta-2 agonist or regular anticholinergic to determine the treatment that gives the best relief of symptoms (and continuing with it), would seem cost effective. This strategy does need formal evaluation. Patient preference is also important, as is the relative importance of avoiding the use of systemic corticosteroids.

Drug therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea in adults

BACKGROUND

The treatment of choice for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) via a mask during sleep. However this is not tolerated by all patients and its role in mild OSA is not proven. Drug therapy has been proposed as an alternative to CPAP in some patients with mild to moderate sleep apnoea and could be of value in patients intolerant of CPAP. A number of mechanisms have been proposed by which drugs could reduce the severity of OSA. These include an increase in tone in the upper airway dilator muscles, an increase in ventilatory drive, a reduction in the proportion of REM sleep, an increase in cholinergic tone during sleep, a reduction in airway resistance and a reduction in surface tension in the upper airway.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of drug therapies in the treatment of sleep apnoea.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We carried out searches on the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. Searches were current as of July 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, placebo controlled trials involving adult patients with confirmed OSA . We excluded trials if continuous positive airways pressure, mandibular devices or oxygen therapy were used. No restriction was placed upon publication language or trial duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion, undertook data extraction according to pre-specified entry criteria, and quality assessment of studies. No response for further information was forthcoming from study authors. Results were expressed as mean differences and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-six trials of 21 drugs, involving 394 participants contributed data to the review. Most of the studies were small and many trials had methodological limitations. Each of the studies states that the subjects had OSA but diagnostic criteria were not always explicit and it is possible that some patients with central apnoeas may have been recruited. Six drugs had some impact on OSA severity and two altered daytime symptoms. One study reported that apnoea hypopnea index (AHI) was lower following treatment with intranasal fluticasone compared with placebo (23.3 versus 30.3) in 24 participants with sleep apnoea and rhinitis. Subjective alertness in the daytime also improved. Physostigmine gave an AHI of 41 compared to 54 on placebo (10 participants) and in a similar study Mirtazipine 15 mg produced an AHI of 13 compared to 23.7 for placebo (10 participants). Topical nasal lubricant given twice overnight resulted in an AHI of 14 compared to 24 with placebo (10 participants). These three latter studies were of single night crossover design and so there are no data on the acceptability of these treatments or their effect on symptoms. Paroxetine was shown to reduce AHI to 23.3 compared to 30.3 for placebo, most of the 20 participants tolerated the treatment but there was no improvement in daytime symptoms. Acetazolamide also reduced the AHI (one crossover trial of nine patients, mean difference 24 (95% CI 4 to 44). However there was no symptomatic benefit from the drug and it was poorly tolerated in the long term. Protriptyline led to a symptomatic improvement (improved versus not improved) in two out of three crossover trials (13 participants, Peto Odds Ratio 29.2 (95% CI 2.8 to 301.1) but there was no change in the apnoea frequency. In one trial naltrexone did reduce AHI, but total sleep time favoured placebo. No significant beneficial effects were found for medroxy progesterone, clonidine, mibefradil, cilazapril, buspirone, aminophylline, theophylline doxapram, ondansetron or sabeluzole.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of drug therapy in the treatment of OSA. Small studies have reported positive effects of certain agents on short-term outcome. Certain agents have been shown to reduce the AHI in largely unselected populations with OSA by between 24 and 45%. For fluticasone, mirtazipine, physostigmine and nasal lubricant, studies of longer duration are required to establish whether this has an impact on daytime symptoms. Individual patients had more complete responses to particular drugs. It is likely that better matching of drugs to patients according to the dominant mechanism of their OSA will lead to better results and this also needs further study.

Oral xanthines as maintenance treatment for asthma in children

BACKGROUND

Xanthines have been used in the treatment of asthma as a bronchodilator, though they may also have anti-inflammatory effects. The current role of xanthines in the long-term treatment of childhood asthma needs to be reassessed.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of xanthines (e.g. theophylline) in the maintenance treatment of paediatric asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A search of the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register was undertaken with predefined search terms. Searches are current to May 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials,lasting at least four weeks comparing a xanthine with placebo, regular short-acting beta-agonist (SABA), inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), cromoglycate (SCG), ketotifen (KET) or leukotriene antagonist, in children with diagnosed with chronic asthma between 18 months and 18 years old.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected each study for inclusion in the review and extracted data. Primary outcome was percentage of symptom-free days.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-four studies (2734 participants) of adequate quality were included. Xanthine versus placebo (17 studies): The proportion of symptom free days was larger with xanthine compared with placebo (7.97% [95% CI 3.41, 12.53]). Rescue medication usage was lower with xanthine, with no significant difference in symptom scores or hospitalisations. FEV1 , and PEF were better with xanthine. Xanthine was associated with non - specific side-effects. Data from behavioural scores were inconclusive. Xanthine versus ICS (four studies) : Exacerbations were less frequent with ICS, but no significant difference on lung function was observed. Individual studies reported significant improvements in symptom measures in favour of steroids, and one study reported a difference in growth rate in favour of xanthine. No difference was observed for study withdrawal or tremor. Xanthine was associated with more frequent headache and nausea. Xanthine versus regular SABA (10 studies): No significant difference in symptoms, rescue medication usage and spirometry. Individual studies reported improvement in PEF with beta-agonist. Beta-agonist treatment led to fewer hospitalisations and headaches. Xanthine was associated with less tremor. Xanthine versus SCG (six studies ): No significant difference in symptoms, exacerbations and rescue medication. Sodium cromoglycate was associated with fewer gastro-intestinal side-effects than xanthine. Xanthine versus KET (one study): No statistical tests of significance between xanthine and ketotifen were reported. Xanthine + ICS versus placebo + same dose ICS (three studies) : Results were conflicting due to clinical/methodological differences, and could not be aggregated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Xanthines as first-line preventer alleviate symptoms and reduce requirement for rescue medication in children with mild to moderate asthma. When compared with ICS they were less effective in preventing exacerbations. Xanthines had similar efficacy as single preventative agent compared with regular SABA and SCG. Evidence on AEs (adverse effects) was equivocal: there was evidence for increased AEs overall, but no evidence that any specific AE (including effects on behaviour and attention) occurred more frequently than with placebo. There is insufficient evidence from available studies to make firm conclusions about the effectiveness of xanthines as add-on preventative treatment to ICS, and there are no published paediatric studies comparing xanthines with alternatives in this role. Our data suggest that xanthines are only suitable as first-line preventative asthma therapy in children when ICS are not available. They may have a role as add-on therapy in more severe asthma not controlled by ICS, but further studies are needed to examine this, and to define the risk-benefit ratio compared with other agents.

Oral appliances for obstructive sleep apnoea

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea (OSAH) is a syndrome characterised by recurrent episodes of partial or complete upper airway obstruction during sleep that are usually terminated by an arousal. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the primary treatment for OSAH , but many patients are unable or unwilling to comply with this treatment. Oral appliances (OA) are an alternative treatment for OSAH.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to review the effects of OA in the treatment of OSAH in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register. Searches were current as of June 2005. Reference lists of articles were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing OA with control or other treatments in adults with OSAH .

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Study authors were contacted for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen studies (745 participants) met the inclusion criteria. All the studies had some shortcomings, such as small sample size, under-reporting of methods and data, and lack of blinding. OA versus control appliances (six studies): OA reduced daytime sleepiness in two crossover trials (WMD -1.81;95%CI -2.72 to -0.90), and improved apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) (-10.78; 95% CI-15.53 to -6.03 parallel group data - five studies). OA versus CPAP (nine studies): OA were less effective than CPAP in reducing apnoea-hypopnoea index (parallel group studies: WMD 13 (95% CI 7.63 to 18.36), two trials; crossover studies: WMD 7.97; (95% CI 6.38 to 9.56, seven trials). However, no significant difference was observed on symptom scores. CPAP was more effective at improving minimum arterial oxygen saturation during sleep compared with OA. In two small crossover studies, participants preferred OA therapy to CPAP. OA versus corrective upper airway surgery (one study): Symptoms of daytime sleepiness were initially lower with surgery, but this difference disappeared at 12 months. AHI did not differ significantly initially, but did so after 12 months in favour of OA.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is increasing evidence suggesting that OA improves subjective sleepiness and sleep disordered breathing compared with a control. CPAP appears to be more effective in improving sleep disordered breathing than OA. The difference in symptomatic response between these two treatments is not significant, although it is not possible to exclude an effect in favour of either therapy. Until there is more definitive evidence on the effectiveness of OA in relation to CPAP, with regard to symptoms and long-term complications, it would appear to be appropriate to recommend OA therapy to patients with mild symptomatic OSAH, and those patients who are unwilling or unable to tolerate CPAP therapy. Future research should recruit patients with more severe symptoms of sleepiness, to establish whether the response to therapy differs between subgroups in terms of quality of life, symptoms and persistence with usage. Long-term data on cardiovascular health are required.

Continuous positive airways pressure for obstructive sleep apnoea in adults

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnoea is the periodic reduction (hypopnoea) or cessation (apnoea) of breathing due to narrowing or occlusion of the upper airway during sleep. The main symptom is daytime sleepiness and it has been suggested it is linked to premature death, hypertension, ischaemic heart disease, stroke and road traffic accidents.

OBJECTIVES

The main treatment for sleep apnoea is with the use of continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP), which requires a flow generator and mask. These are used at night to prevent apnoea, hypoxia and sleep disturbance. The objective was to assess the effects of CPAP in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register and reference lists of articles. We consulted experts in the field. Searches were current to July 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials comparing nocturnal CPAP with an inactive control or oral appliances in adults with obstructive sleep apnoea (an apnoea and hypopnoea index greater than five per hour). Trials had a minimum intervention period of two weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed and two review authors extracted data independently. Study authors were contacted for missing information. Parallel and crossover group trials were analysed separately.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-six trials involving 1718 people met the inclusion criteria. Study quality was mixed. Compared with control, CPAP showed significant improvements in objective and subjective sleepiness and several quality of life, cognitive function and depression measures (parallel-group studies: Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) -3.83 units, 95% CI -4.57 to -3.09; crossover studies: ESS -1.84 units, 95% CI -2.57 to -1.11). Twenty-four hour systolic and diastolic blood pressures were lower with CPAP compared with control (parallel-group trials). Compared with oral appliances, CPAP significantly reduced the apnoea and hypopnoea index (crossover studies: -7.97 events/hr, 95% CI -9.56 to -6.38) and improved sleep efficiency (crossover studies: 2.31%, 95% CI 0.02 to 4.6) and minimum oxygen saturation (4.14%, 95% CI 3.25 to 5.03). Responders to both treatments expressed a strong preference for the oral appliance. However, participants were more likely to withdraw on OA than on CPAP therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

CPAP is effective in reducing symptoms of sleepiness and improving quality of life measures in people with moderate and severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). It is more effective than oral appliances in reducing respiratory disturbances in these people but subjective outcomes are more equivocal. Certain people tend to prefer oral appliances to CPAP where both are effective. This could be because they offer a more convenient way of controlling OSA. Short-term data indicate that CPAP leads to lower blood pressure than in controls. Long-term data are required for all outcomes in order to determine whether the initial benefits seen in short-term clinical trials persist.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of gastro-oesophageal reflux interventions for chronic cough associated with gastro-oesophageal reflux

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of treatment for gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD) on chronic cough in children and adults without an underlying respiratory disease.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane, Medline, and Embase databases, references from review articles.

INCLUDED STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials on GORD treatment for cough in children and adults without primary lung disease. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted paediatric and adult data on primary (clinical failure) and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

11 studies were included. Meta-analysis was limited to five studies in adults that compared proton pump inhibitors with placebo. All outcomes favoured proton pump inhibitors: the odds ratio for clinical failure (primary outcome) was 0.24 (95% confidence interval 0.04 to 1.27); number needed to treat (NNT) was 5 (harm 50 to infinity to benefit 2.5). For secondary outcomes, the standardised mean difference between proton pump inhibitors and placebo was -0.51 (-1.02 to 0.01) for mean cough score at the end of the trial and -0.29 (-0.62 to 0.04) for change in cough score at the end of the trial. Subgroup analysis with generic inverse variance analysis showed a significant mean change in cough (-0.41 SD units, -0.75 to -0.07).

CONCLUSION

Use of a proton pump inhibitor to treat cough associated with GORD has some effect in some adults. The effect, however, is less universal than suggested in consensus guidelines on chronic cough and its magnitude of effect is uncertain.

Fluticasone versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) is a relatively new inhaled corticosteroid for the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess efficacy and safety outcomes in studies that compared FP to placebo for treatment of chronic asthma.2. To explore the presence of a dose-response effect.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (January 2005), reference lists of articles, contacted trialists and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997-2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing FP to placebo in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted data. Quantitative analyses were undertaken using RevMan 4.2

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-five studies met the inclusion criteria (14,208 participants). Methodological quality was high. In non-oral steroid treated asthmatics with mild and moderate disease FP resulted in improvements from baseline compared with placebo across all dose ranges (100 to 1000 mcg/d) in FEV1 (between 0.13 to 0.45 litres); morning PEF (between 23 and 47 L/min); symptom scores (based on a standardised scale, between 0.5 and 0.85); reduction in rescue beta-2 agonist use (between 1.2 and 2.2 puffs/day). High dose FP increased the number of patients who could withdraw from prednisolone: FP 1000-1500 mcg/day Peto Odds Ratio 14.07 (95% CI 7.17 to 27.57). FP at all doses led to a greater likelihood of sore throat, hoarseness and oral Candidiasis. Twenty-one patients would need to be treated for one extra to develop Candidiasis (FP 500 mcg/day), whilst only three or four patients need to be treated to avoid one extra patient being withdrawn due to lack of efficacy at all doses of FP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Doses of FP in the range 100-1000 mcg/day are effective. In most patients with mild-moderate asthma improvements with low dose FP are only a little less than those associated with high doses when compared with placebo. High dose FP appears to have worthwhile oral-corticosteroid reducing properties. FP use is accompanied by an increased likelihood of oropharyngeal side effects.

Macrolides for chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic disease of the airways in which inflammation of the respiratory mucosa plays a crucial role. The mechanisms responsible for the maintaining of this inflammatory response are only partially known and there is evidence that a role could be paid by chronic infection by intracellular pathogens (such as Chlamydia pneumoniae). Macrolides are antibiotics with both antimicrobic and antiinflammatory activities and thus their use in asthmatic patients could lead to reduction of the airways inflammation and therefore improvement of symptoms and pulmonary function.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether macrolides are effective in the management of patients with chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials up to May 2005. This was also supplemented by manually searching bibliographies of previously published reviews, conference proceedings, and contacting study authors. All languages were included in the initial search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, controlled clinical trials involving both children and adult patients with chronic asthma treated with macrolides for more than 4 weeks, versus placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently examined all identified articles. The full text of any potentially relevant article was reviewed independently by two reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies recruiting a total of 416 participants met the inclusion criteria. The quality of reporting of study methodology was generally low. We assembled findings from studies comparing macrolide treatment for at least 4 weeks in adult and pediatric patients treated for chronic asthma. Four studies showed a positive effect on symptoms of macrolides in different types of asthmatic patients. There were limited data available for meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in FEV1 for either parallel or crossover trials. However, there were significant differences in eosinophilic inflammation and symptoms. One large parallel group trial reported significant differences in peak flow but these differences abated within six months of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Considering the small number of patients studied, there is insufficient evidence to support or to refute the use of macrolides in patients with chronic asthma. Further studies are needed in particular to clarify the potential role of macrolides in some subgroups of asthmatics such as those with evidence of chronic bacterial infection.

Fluticasone versus HFA-beclomethasone dipropionate for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

The relative efficacy of fluticasone (FP) and beclomethasone (BDP) propelled with CFCs has been well established. The potency of HFA-BDP is thought to have been improved with new propellant and some studies suggest that it may equipotent at half the dose of CFC propelled-BDP. There is a need to revisit this question in the light of a potentially more potent new non-CFC propellant.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative efficacy of FP and HFA-propelled BDP in chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register was searched using pre-specified terms. Searches were current as of March 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials were eligible for inclusion in the review. We compared either CFC or HFA-propelled FP with HFA-propelled BDP. We made a distinction between HFA-BDP and HFA-BDP extra fine, which dispenses smaller particles of drug, leading to different, usually more peripheral distribution in the airways. Any inhaler device was considered, and there was no restriction on studies with or without spacers. We included studies which assessed HFA-BDP given via either pMDI, breath-actuated MDI, or DPI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review. Data were extracted and entered in to RevMan 4.2 using standard meta-analytical techniques with predefined criteria for exploring statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies (1230 participants) met the inclusion criteria of the review. One study was conducted in children. Study reporting quality was fair, but all studies were of short duration (three to twelve weeks). Only studies assessing HFA-BDP extra fine in comparison with FP were identified. Lung function was not significantly different between extra fine BDP and FP when compared at the same dose in parallel studies, change in FEV1: 0.04 litres (95% CI -0.03 to 0.11 litres; three studies, 659 adults); change in am PEF: -0.69 litres (95% CI -11.21 to 9.83 litres; two studies, 364 adults). Individual studies reported non-significant findings in symptom scores and quality of life questionnaires. There was no significant difference between FP and HFA-BDP in the risk of study withdrawal, dysphonia or when data were reported as any adverse event.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference between FP and extra fine HFA-BDP on FEV(1) or peak flow at a dose ratio of 1:1. However, the number of studies and width of the confidence intervals in the analyses do not exclude a clinically meaningful difference between these two drugs. Difficulty in the successful manipulation of the devices studied may be a barrier to the widespread use of MDIs. One paediatric study was included in the review, so extrapolation of the findings of this review to children is limited. Further longer term studies in adults and children with moderate and severe asthma are required.

Surgery for obstructive sleep apnoea

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnoea/hypopnoea syndrome(OSAHS) is the periodic reduction or cessation of airflow during sleep. The syndrome is associated with loud snoring, disrupted sleep and observed apnoeas. Surgery for obstructive sleep apnoea/hypopnoea syndrome aims to alleviate symptoms of daytime sleepiness, improve quality of life, and reduce the signs of sleep apnoea recorded by polysomnography.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of any type of surgery for the treatment of the symptoms of obstructive sleep apnoea/hypopnoea syndrome in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles. We contacted experts in the field, research dissemination bodies and other Cochrane Review Groups. Searches were current as of July 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing any surgical intervention for obstructive sleep apnoea/hypopnoea syndrome with other surgical or non-surgical interventions or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed electronic literature search results for possibly relevant studies. Characteristics and data from studies meeting the inclusion criteria were extracted and entered into RevMan 4.2.

MAIN RESULTS

In the 2005 update for this review eight studies (412 participants) of mixed quality met the inclusion criteria. Data from seven studies were eligible for assessment in the review. No data could be pooled. Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP) versus conservative management (one trial): An un validated symptom score showed intermittent significant differences over a 12-month follow-up period. No differences in Polysomnography (PSG) outcomes were reported. Laser-assisted uvulopalatoplasty (LAUP) versus conservative management/placebo (two trials): One study recruited mixed a population, and separate data could not be obtained for this trial. In the other study no significant differences in Epworth scores or quality of life reported. A significant difference in favour of LAUP was reported in terms of apnoea hypopnoea index (AHI) and frequency and intensity of snoring. UPPP versus oral appliance (OA) (one trial): AHI was significantly lower with OA therapy than with UPPP. No significant differences were observed in quality of life. UPPP versus lateral pharyngoplasty (lateral PP) (one trial): No significant difference in Epworth scores, but a greater reduction in AHI with lateral PP was reported. Tongue advancement (mandibular osteotomy) + PPP versus tongue suspension + PPP (one trial): There was a significant reduction in symptoms in both groups, but no significant difference between the two surgery types. Complications reported with all surgical techniques included nasal regurgitation, pain and bleeding. These did not persist in the long term. An additional study assessed the effects of four different techniques. No data were available on between group comparisons. Multilevel temperature-controlled radiofrequency tissue ablation (TCRFTA) versus sham placebo and CPAP (one trial): There was an improvement in primary and secondary outcomes of TCRFTA over sham placebo and but no difference in symptomatic improvement when compared with CPAP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are now a small number of trials assessing different surgical techniques with inactive and active control treatments. The studies assembled in the review do not provide evidence to support the use of surgery in sleep apnoea/hypopnoea syndrome, as overall significant benefit has not been demonstrated. The participants recruited to the studies had mixed levels of AHI, but tended to suffer from moderate daytime sleepiness where this was measured. Short-term outcomes are unlikely to consistently identify suitable candidates for surgery. Long-term follow-up of patients who undergo surgical correction of upper airway obstruction is required. This would help to determine whether surgery is a curative intervention, or whether there is a tendency for the signs and symptoms of sleep apnoea to re-assert themselves, prompting patients to seek further treatment for sleep apnoea.

Macrolides for chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a chronic disease of the airways in which inflammation of the respiratory mucosa plays a crucial role. The mechanisms responsible for the maintaining of this inflammatory response are only partially known and there is evidence that a role could be paid by chronic infection by intracellular pathogens (such as Chlamydia pneumoniae). Macrolides are antibiotics with both antimicrobic and antiinflammatory activities and thus their use in asthmatic patients could lead to reduction of the airways inflammation and therefore improvement of symptoms and pulmonary function.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether macrolides are effective in the management of patients with chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials up to May 2004. This was also supplemented by manually searching bibliographies of previously published reviews, conference proceedings, and contacting study authors. All languages were included in the initial search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, controlled clinical trials involving both children and adult patients with chronic asthma treated with macrolides for more than 4 weeks, versus placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently examined all identified articles. The full text of any potentially relevant article was reviewed independently by two reviewers.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven studies recruiting a total of 416 participants met the inclusion criteria. The quality of reporting of study methodology was generally low. We assembled findings from studies comparing macrolide treatment for at least 4 weeks in adult and pediatric patients treated for chronic asthma. Four studies showed a positive effect on symptoms of macrolides in different types of asthmatic patients. There were limited data available for meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in FEV1 for either parallel or crossover trials. However, there were significant differences in eosinophilic inflammation and symptoms. One large parallel group trial reported significant differences in peak flow but these differences abated within six months of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Considering the small number of patients studied, there is insufficient evidence to support or to refute the use of macrolides in patients with chronic asthma. Further studies are needed in particular to clarify the potential role of macrolides in some subgroups of asthmatics such as those with evidence of chronic bacterial infection.

Inhaled fluticasone at different doses for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) is a high-potency inhaled corticosteroid used in the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess the efficacy and safety outcomes of inhaled fluticasone at different nominal daily doses in the treatment of chronic asthma. 2. To test for the presence of a dose-response effect.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register (January 2005) and reference lists of articles. We contacted trialists and pharmaceutical companies for additional studies and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997 to 2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing fluticasone at different nominal daily doses in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer extracted data. These were checked and verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative analyses where undertaken using RevMan (Analyses 1.0.2).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-three studies (45 data sets with 8913 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was high. In asthmatics with mild to moderate disease who were not on oral steroids a dose-response effect was present with FP for change in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). For low doses (100 versus 200 microg/day) the weighted mean difference (WMD) was 6.29 litres/min, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.28 to 10.29. Comparing medium (400 to 500 microg/day) to low dose (200 microg/day) FP the WMD was 6.46 litres/min (95% CI 3.02 to 9.89); this effect was more pronounced in one trial with more severely asthmatic children. For FP 100 versus 400 to 500 microg/day the WMD was 8 litres/min (95% CI 1 to 15) and at high versus low doses (800 to 1000 versus 50 to 100 microg/d) the WMD was 22 litres/min (95% CI 15 to 29). When high and medium doses were compared there was no significant difference in the change in morning PEF: at 400 to 500 versus 800 to 1000 microg/day the WMD was 0.16 litres/min (95% CI 6.95 to 6.63). There was no dose-response effect on symptoms or rescue beta-2 agonist use. The likelihood of hoarseness and oral candidiasis was significantly greater for the higher doses (800 to 1000 microg/day). People with oral steroid-dependent asthma treated with FP (2000 microg/day) were significantly more likely to reduce oral prednisolone than those on 1000 to 1500 microg/day (Peto odds Ratio 2.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 6.3). The highest dose also allowed a significant reduction in daily oral prednisolone dose compared to 1000 to 1500 microg/day (WMD 2.0 mg/day, 95% CI 0.1 to 4.0 mg/day).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Effects of fluticasone are dose dependent but relatively small. At dose ratios of 1:2, there are significant differences in favour of the higher dose in morning peak flow across the low dose range. The clinical impact of these differences is open to interpretation. Patients with moderate disease achieve similar levels of asthma control on medium doses of fluticasone (400 to 500 microg/day) as they do on high doses (800 to 1000 microg/day). More work in severe asthma would help to confirm that doses of FP above 500 microg/day confer greater benefit in this subgroup than doses of around 200 microg/day. In oral corticosteroid-dependent asthmatics, reductions in prednisolone requirement may be gained with FP 2000 microg/day.

Gastro-oesophageal reflux treatment for prolonged non-specific cough in children and adults

BACKGROUND

Cough is a very common symptom presenting to medical practitioners. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GORD) is said to be the causative factor in up to 41% of adults with chronic cough. However cough and GORD are common ailments and their co-existence by chance is high. Also cough can induce reflux episodes. Treatment for GORD includes conservative measures (diet manipulation), pharmaceutical therapy (motility or prokinetic agents, H(2) antagonist and proton pump inhibitors (PPI)) and fundoplication.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of GORD treatment on chronic cough in children and adults with GORD and prolonged cough that is not related to an underlying respiratory disease i.e. non-specific chronic cough.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register Collaboration and Cochrane Airways Group, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, review articles and reference lists of relevant articles were searched. The date of last search was 4th April 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials on GORD treatment for cough in children and adults without primary lung disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Results of searches were reviewed against pre-determined criteria for inclusion. Two independent reviewers selected, extracted and assessed data for inclusion. Authors were contacted for further information. Data was analysed as "intention to treat" as well as "treatment received". Paediatric and adults data were considered separately. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

MAIN RESULTS

11 studies (3 paediatric, 8 adults; 383 participants) were included. None of the paediatric studies could be included in meta-analysis. In adults, analysis on use of H(2) antagonist, motility agents and conservative treatment for GORD were not possible (from lack of data) and there were no controlled studies on fundoplication as an intervention. Five adult studies comparing PPI (2-3 months) to placebo were analysed for various outcomes in the meta-analysis. Enrollment of subjects for two studies were primarily from medical clinics and another three studies were otolaryngeal clinic patients. Using "intention to treat", pooled data from three studies resulted in no significant difference between treatment and placebo in total resolution of cough. Pooled data revealed no significant improvement in cough outcomes (end of trial or change in cough scores). Significant differences were only found in sensitivity analysis. A significant improvement in change of cough scores was found in end of intervention (2-3 months) in those receiving PPI with a standardised mean difference of -0.41 (95%CI -0.75, -0.07) using GIV analysis on cross over trials. Two studies reported improvement in cough after 5 days to 2 weeks of treatment. Significant heterogeneity was found between studies using omeprazole and other PPIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to definitely conclude that GORD treatment with PPI is beneficial for cough associated with GORD in adults. The beneficial effect was only seen in sub-analysis and its effect was small. The optimal duration of such a trial of therapy to evaluate response could not be ascertained in the meta-analysis although two RCTs reported significant change by two weeks of therapy. Clinicians should be cognisant of a period (natural resolution with time) and placebo effect in studies that utilise cough as an outcome measure. Data in children are inconclusive. Future paediatric and adult studies are needed whereby studies should be double blind, randomised controlled, parallel design, using treatments for at least two months, with validated subjective and objective cough outcomes and include ascertainment of time to respond as well as assessment of acid and/or non acid reflux whilst on therapy.

Corticosteroids for pulmonary sarcoidosis

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary sarcoidosis is a common condition with an unpredictable course. Oral (OCS) or inhaled steroids (ICS) are widely used in its treatment, but there is no consensus about when and in whom therapy should be initiated, what dose should be given and for how long. Corticosteroids given for several months have deleterious side-effects so it is important to know whether they have any maintained benefit in pulmonary sarcoidosis.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence for the benefit of corticosteroids (oral or inhaled) in the treatment of pulmonary sarcoidosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched using predefined terms. Bibliographies of retrieved RCTs and reviews were searched for additional RCTs. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of identified RCTs were contacted for other published and unpublished studies. Searches are current as of May 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two reviewers independently assessed full text articles for inclusion based upon the following criteria: the study had to be a RCT or controlled clinical trial in adults with histological evidence of pulmonary sarcoidosis, treated with OCS (oral steroids) or ICS (oral steroids), compared with a control.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study quality was assessed and data extracted independently by two reviewers. The primary outcome was CXR (chest x-ray). Outcomes were analysed as continuous and dichotomous outcomes, using standard statistical techniques. Heterogeneity was explored where it was identified.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve RCTs of variable quality involving 1051 participants met the inclusion criteria of the review. The oral steroid dose was equivalent to prednisolone 4-40 mg/day. OCS: there was an improvement in CXR over 3-24 months (Relative Risk (RR): 1.46 [1.01 to 2.09], 3 studies), but this finding requires cautious interpretation. No other significant differences were identified on secondary outcomes. ICS: Data were inadequate to perform meaningful analysis of data on CXR. Two studies showed no improvement in lung function, In one study there was an improvement in diffusing capacity in the treated group. There were no data on side-effects. In one study symptoms improved at the end of six months of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral steroids improved the chest X-ray and a global score of CXR, symptoms and spirometry over 3-24 months. However, there is little evidence of an improvement in lung function. There are limited data beyond two years to indicate whether oral steroids have any modifying effect on long-term disease progression. Oral steroids may be of benefit for patients with Stage 2 and 3 disease with moderate to severe or progressive symptoms or CXR changes.

Inhaled fluticasone versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) is a relatively new inhaled corticosteroid for the treatment of asthma.

OBJECTIVES

1. To assess efficacy and safety outcomes in studies that compared FP to placebo for treatment of chronic asthma.2. To explore the presence of a dose-response effect.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trial Register (January 2004), reference lists of articles, contacted trialists and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997-2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing FP to placebo in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers extracted data. Quantitative analyses where undertaken using RevMan Analyses 4.2.7.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty eight studies met the inclusion criteria (11, 104 participants). Methodological quality was high. In non-oral steroid treated asthmatics with mild and moderate disease FP resulted in improvements from baseline compared with placebo across all dose ranges (100 to 1000 mcg/d) in FEV1 (between 0.13 to 0.45 litres); morning PEF (between 27 and 47 L/min); symptom scores (based on a standardised scale, between 0.5 and 0.85); reduction in rescue beta-2 agonist use (between 1.2 and 2.2 puffs/d). High dose FP reduced the number of patients dependent on prednisolone: FP 1000-1500 mcg/d Peto Odds Ratio 0.07 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.10). FP at all doses led to a greater likelihood of sore throat, hoarseness and oral Candidiasis, but 21 patients would need to be treated for one extra to develop Candidiasis (FP 500 mcg/day), whilst only three or four patients need to be treated to avoid one extra patient being withdrawn due to lack of efficacy at all doses of FP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Doses of FP in the range 100-1000 mcg/d are effective. In most patients with mild-moderate asthma improvements with low dose FP are only a little less than those associated with high doses when compared with placebo. High dose FP appears to have worthwhile oral-corticosteroid reducing properties. FP use is accompanied by an increased likelihood of oropharyngeal side effects.

Intravenous aminophylline for acute severe asthma in children over two years receiving inhaled bronchodilators

BACKGROUND

Since the advent of inhaled beta2-agonists, anticholinergic agents and glucocorticoids, the role of aminophylline in paediatric acute asthma has become less clear. There remains some consensus that it is beneficial in children with acute severe asthma, receiving maximised therapy (oxygen, inhaled bronchodilators, and glucocorticoids).

OBJECTIVES

To determine if the addition of intravenous aminophylline produces a beneficial effect in children with acute severe asthma receiving conventional therapy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Airways Group register of trials was used to identify relevant studies. The latest search was carried out in December 2004

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised-controlled trials comparing intravenous aminophylline with placebo in addition to usual care in children met the inclusion criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies and extracted data. Disagreement in the selection of trials was resolved by consensus. Attempts were made to contact authors to verify accuracy of data.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials met the inclusion criteria (380 participants). Methodological quality was high. All studies recruited children with acute severe asthma and requiring hospital admission. Six studies sought participants who were unresponsive to nebulised short-acting beta-agonist and administered systemic steroids to study participants. In two studies where some children were able to perform spirometry, baseline FEV1 was between 35 and 45% predicted. The addition of aminophylline to steroids and beta2-agonist significantly improved FEV1% predicted over placebo at 6-8 hours, 12-18 hours and 24 hours. Aminophylline led to a greater improvement in PEF% predicted over placebo at 12-18 hours. There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay, symptoms, frequency of nebulsations and mechanical ventilation rates. There were insufficient data to permit aggregation for oxygenation and duration of supplemental oxygen therapy. Aminophylline led to a three-fold increase in the risk of vomiting. There was no significant difference between treatment groups with regard to hypokalaemia, headaches, tremour, seizures, arrhythmias and deaths.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In children with a severe asthma exacerbation, the addition of intravenous aminophylline to beta2-agonists and glucocorticoids (with or without anticholinergics) improves lung function within 6 hours of treatment. However there is no apparent reduction in symptoms, number of nebulised treatment and length of hospital stay. There is insufficient evidence to assess the impact on oxygenation, PICU admission and mechanical ventilation. Aminophylline is associated with a significant increased risk of vomiting.

Prostacyclin for pulmonary hypertension in adults

BACKGROUND

Primary pulmonary hypertension (PPH) is progressive, resulting in right ventricular failure. Pulmonary hypertension can be idiopathic or associated with other conditions. Prostacyclin is a potent vasodilator and inhibitor of platelet aggregation, and can be given orally, subcutaneously, intravenously or inhaled via a nebuliser.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of prostacyclin or one of its analogues in idiopathic primary pulmonary hypertension.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches were carried out with pre-specified terms. Searches were current as of July 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two reviewers selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults with pulmonary hypertension for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Study quality was assessed and data extracted independently by two reviewers. Outcomes were analysed as continuous and dichotomous outcomes. We sub-grouped data where possible by aetiology of PH (PPH, PH secondary to connective tissue disorder or mixed populations).

MAIN RESULTS

Nine RCTs of mixed duration (3 days-52 weeks), recruiting 1175 participants were included (NYHA functional classes II-IV). Intravenous prostacyclin versus usual care (four studies): There were significant improvements in exercise capacity of around 90 metres, cardiopulmonary haemodynamics and NYHA functional class over 3 days-12 weeks. Effects were consistent in primary and secondary pulmonary hypertension. Oral prostacyclin versus placebo (two studies): Short-term data (3-6 months) indicated that there was a significant improvement in exercise capacity, but data from one study of 52 weeks reported no significant difference at 12 months. No significant differences were observed for any other outcome. Subcutaneous treprostinil versus placebo (two studies, 8-12 weeks):One large study reported a significant median improvement in exercise capacity of around 16 metres. Cardiopulmonary haemodynamics and symptom scores favoured treprostinil. Infusion site pain and withdrawals due to adverse events were more frequent with treprostinil. Inhaled prostacyclin versus placebo (one study, 12 weeks):There was a significant increase in exercise capacity of approximately 36 metres. Treatment led to better symptom scores and functional class status than with placebo. Subgroup analyses reported by individual studies showed a better exercise capacity in participants with PPH, than those participants with PH secondary to other diseases. Side effects and adverse events were common in the studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that intravenous prostacyclin in addition to conventional therapy at tolerable doses optimised by titration, can confer some short-term benefits (up to 12 weeks of treatment) in exercise capacity, NYHA functional class and cardiopulmonary haemodynamics. There is also some evidence that patients with more severe disease based upon NYHA functional class showed a greater response to treatment.

Inhaled fluticasone versus inhaled beclomethasone or inhaled budesonide for chronic asthma in adults and children

BACKGROUND

Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) and budesonide (BUD) are commonly prescribed inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of asthma. Fluticasone propionate (FP) is newer agent with greater potency in in-vitro assays.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of Fluticasone to Beclomethasone or Budesonide in the treatment of chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trial register (January 2004) and reference lists of articles. We contacted trialists and pharmaceutical companies for additional studies and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997 to 2003).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing Fluticasone to either Beclomethasone or Budesonide in the treatment of chronic asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality. One reviewer extracted data. Quantitative analyses were undertaken using RevMan analyses 1.0.1.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty six studies (12, 119 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was variable. Dose ratio 1:2: FP produced a significantly greater FEV1 (0.14 litres, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.22), morning PEF (11.10 L/min, 95%CI 3.12 to 19.09 L/min) and evening PEF (9.31 L/min, 95%CI 5.12 to 13.5 L/min). This applied to all drug doses, age groups, and delivery devices. No difference between FP and BDP/BUD were seen for trial withdrawals. Symptoms and rescue medication use were widely reported but few trials provided sufficient data for analysis. When given at half the dose of BDP/BUD, FP led to a greater likelihood of pharyngitis. There was no difference in the likelihood of oral candidiasis. Plasma cortisol and 24 hour urinary cortisol was measured frequently but data presentation was limited. Dose ratio 1:1: FP produced a statistically significant difference in am PEF (9.58 L/min (95% CI 5.20 to 13.97)), pm PEF (7.41 L/min (95% CI 2.61 to 12.22)), and FEV1 (0.09 L (0.02 to 0.17)). The effects on exacerbations were mixed. There was an increase in the incidence of hoarseness, but no significant difference in pharyngitis, candidiasis, or cough.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Fluticasone given at half the daily dose of beclomethasone or budesonide leads to small improvements in measures of airway calibre, but it appears to have a higher risk of causing hoarseness when given at the same daily dose. Future studies should attempt to establish the relative efficacy of inhaled steroids delivered with CFC-free propellants.

An overview of two Cochrane systematic reviews of complementary treatments for chronic asthma: acupuncture and homeopathy

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture and homeopathy are commonly used complementary treatments for chronic asthma. This review summarizes two recently updated Cochrane systematic reviews that assess the safety and efficacy of homeopathy or acupuncture in individuals with chronic stable asthma.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Only randomized-controlled trials were considered for inclusion. Statistical aggregation of the data was undertaken where possible.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Searches for both reviews were done with the assistance of the Cochrane Airways Group, and through electronic alerts.

RESULTS

ACUPUNCTURE: 11 studies with 324 participants met the inclusion criteria. Trial reporting was poor, and the trial quality was deemed inadequate to generalize the findings. There was variation in the type of active and sham acupunctures, the outcomes assessed and the time points measured. The points used in the sham arm of some studies are used for the treatment of asthma according to traditional Chinese medicine. Two studies used individualized treatment strategies, and one study used a combination strategy of formula acupuncture with the addition of individualized points. No statistically significant or clinically relevant effects were found for acupuncture compared with sham acupuncture. When data from two small studies were pooled, no difference in lung function was observed (post-treatment FEV1): standardized mean difference 0.12, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.55).

CONCLUSION

ACUPUNCTURE: There is not enough evidence to recommend the use of acupuncture in the treatment of asthma. Further research needs to be undertaken, and this should take into account the different types of acupuncture practiced.

RESULTS

HOMEOPATHY: Six trials with a total of 556 people were included in the review. These trials were all placebo-controlled and double-blind, but were of variable quality. Standardized treatments in these trials are unlikely to represent common homeopathic practice where treatment tends to be individualized. The results of the studies are conflicting in terms of effects on lung function. There has been only a limited attempt to measure a "package of care" effect (i.e. the effect of the medication as well as the consultation, which is considered a vital part of individualized homeopathic practice).

CONCLUSION

HOMEOPATHY: There is not enough evidence to reliably assess the possible role of homeopathy in the treatment of asthma. Further studies could assess whether individuals respond to a "package of care" rather than the homeopathic intervention alone.

Interventions to improve compliance with continuous positive airway pressure for obstructive sleep apnoea

BACKGROUND

Continuous Positive Airways Pressure (CPAP) is currently considered to be the cornerstone of therapy for sleep apnoea (OSA). However compliance with this treatment is frequently poor, which may lead to ongoing symptoms of sleep disruption, daytime sleepiness and poor waking cognitive function. Mechanical and psychological/educational interventions have been proposed to try to increase the hours of use of CPAP therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of interventions designed to increase compliance with CPAP.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Sleep Apnoea Specialised Register (January 2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing interventions to improve compliance with CPAP usage were considered for inclusion in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers assessed articles for inclusion in the review and extracted data. Attempts were made to obtain additional unpublished data from the trialists.

MAIN RESULTS

24 studies met the inclusion criteria with 1007 participants. Each of the mechanical interventions was compared with fixed CPAP alone. Auto-CPAP (13 studies): A small, significant difference was observed in compliance but this effect disappeared when we took account of the variation between the studies. There may be a subgroup of patients who respond better than others. Most participants preferred auto-CPAP to fixed CPAP where this was measured. Bi-level PAP (3 studies): No significant differences were observed in compliance. One small study found no difference in preference. Patient titrated CPAP (1 study): No significant difference was observed in compliance. Humidification(1 study): This small study found no significant difference in compliance. Educational/psychological interventions (6 studies): One small study demonstrated superior compliance in patients treated with cognitive behavioural therapy + CPAP versus CPAP alone but only after 12 weeks. In one, larger study intensive support including home visits increased hours of use. No other study demonstrated significant effects in favour of active treatment.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

The effect of Auto-CPAP in increasing hours of use in unselected patients starting this treatment remains unclear. Different pooled analyses gave conflicting results and it may be that carefully selected participants may respond more favourably than others. The evidence in support of Bi-PAP, self-titration and humidification is lacking and studies are required in these areas. There is some evidence that psychological/educational interventions improve CPAP usage. This requires confirmation in larger studies of longer duration, with rigorous follow-up. The cost-benefit ratio of such interventions requires assessment. Future studies need to consider the effects of treatment in participants who are poorly compliant. The studies assembled were characterised by high machine usage in the control groups, and low withdrawal rates making it less likely that any benefit could be demonstrated.

Oral appliances for obstructive sleep apnoea

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea is a syndrome characterised by recurrent episodes of partial or complete upper airway obstruction during sleep that are usually terminated by an arousal. Nasal continuous positive airway pressure is the primary treatment for obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea, but many patients are unable or unwilling to comply with this treatment. Oral appliances are an alternative treatment for sleep apnoea.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to review the effects of oral appliance in the treatment of sleep apnoea in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Sleep Apnoea RCT Register. Searches were current as of June 2004. Reference lists of articles were also searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing oral appliance with control or other treatments in adults with sleep apnoea.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed and two reviewers extracted data independently. Study authors were contacted for missing information.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials involving 553 participants were included. All the studies had some shortcomings, such as small sample size, under-reporting of methods and data, and lack of blinding. Oral appliances versus control appliances (five studies): Oral appliances reduced daytime sleepiness in two crossover trials (WMD -1.81 [95%CI: -2.72, -0.90]), and improved apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) (-13.17 [-18.53 to -7.80] parallel group data - four studies). Oral appliances versus CPAP (seven studies): Oral appliances were less effective than continuous positive pressure in reducing apnoea-hypopnoea index (WMD 13 [95% CI: 7.63, 18.36], parallel studies - two trials; WMD 6.96 [4.82, 9.10] cross-over studies - six trials). However, no significant difference was observed on symptom scores. Nasal continuous positive pressure was more effective at improving minimum arterial oxygen saturation during sleep compared with oral appliance. In two small crossover studies, participants preferred oral appliance therapy to continuous positive airways pressure. Oral appliances versus surgery (one study): Symptoms of daytime sleepiness were initially lower with surgery, but this difference disappeared at 12 months. AHI did not differ significantly initially, but did so after 12 months in favour of OA.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence suggesting that oral appliance improves subjective sleepiness and sleep disordered breathing compared with a control. Nasal continuous positive airways pressure appears to be more effective in improving sleep disordered breathing than oral appliance. Until there is more definitive evidence on the effectiveness of oral appliances, it would appear to be appropriate to restrict oral appliance therapy to patients with sleep apnoea who are unwilling or unable to comply with continuous positive airways pressure therapy.

Inhaled fluticasone versus inhaled beclomethasone or inhaled budesonide for chronic asthma

BACKGROUND

Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) and budesonide (BUD) are commonly prescribed inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of asthma, Fluticasone propionate (FP) is newer agent with greater potency in in-vitro assays.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of Fluticasone to Beclomethasone or Budesonide in the treatment of chronic asthma.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group trial register (January 2003) and reference lists of articles. We contacted trialists and pharmaceutical companies for additional studies and searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings (1997 to 2003).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in children and adults comparing Fluticasone to either Beclomethasone or Budesonide in the treatment of chronic asthma. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One reviewer extracted data. Quantitative analyses were undertaken using RevMan analyses 1.0.1.

MAIN RESULTS

48 studies (11,479 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological quality was variable. When compared at a FP:BUD/BDP dose ratio of 1:2, fluticasone produced a significantly greater FEV1 (Weighted Mean Difference (WMD) 0.11 litres, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.01 to 0.20 litres), morning PEF (WMD 13 L/min, 95%CI 5 to 22 L/min) and evening PEF (WMD 11 L/min, 95%CI 1 to 20 L/min). This applied to all drug doses, age groups, and delivery devices, although subgroup analyses suggested that the relative benefit of FP may be greater in more severe patients treated with higher doses of inhaled corticosteroid. No difference between fluticasone and beclomethasone or budesonide were seen for trial withdrawals (Peto OR 0.76, 95%CI 0.53 to 1.09). Symptoms and rescue medication use were widely reported but few trials provided sufficient data for analysis. A higher likelihood of pharyngitis (Peto Odds Ratio 2.16; 95% CI 1.43 to 3.24) was apparent when patients were treated with fluticasone at twice the dose of BDP/BUD, although there was unexplained heterogeneity in this effect between trials. There was no difference in the likelihood of oral Candidiasis. Plasma cortisol and 24 hour urinary cortisol were measured frequently but data presentation was limited.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Fluticasone given at half the daily dose of beclomethasone or budesonide leads to small improvements in measures of airway calibre, but it appears to have a higher risk of causing side-effects when given at the same daily dose.

Combined corticosteroid and long acting beta-agonist in one inhaler for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Long-acting beta-agonists and inhaled corticosteroids have both been recommended in guidelines for the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Their co-administration in a combined inhaler is intended to facilitate adherence to medication regimens, and to improve efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of combined inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta-agonist preparations, compared to placebo or the individual components, in the treatment of adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) trials register. Date of last search April 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were included if they were randomised and double-blind. Studies could compare a combined inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonist preparation with either component preparation or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcome was exacerbations.

MAIN RESULTS

Six randomised trials with 4118 participants were included. Two different combination preparations (fluticasone/salmeterol and budesonide/formoterol) were used. Combination treatment was more effective than placebo for mean exacerbation rates, quality of life and lung function. No trials were found comparing the combination of drugs in a single inhaler with the same drugs both given in separate inhalers. Exacerbations: Fluticasone/salmeterol did not significantly reduce exacerbations compared with either of its component treatments in one large study. There was no significant difference when budesonide/formoterol was compared with budesonide. Budesonide/formoterol was more effective than formoterol in reducing exacerbations (Rate ratio: 0.78 [0.68 to 0.90], two studies). A pooled analysis of both combination therapies indicated that exacerbations were less frequent when compared with either placebo or long-acting beta-agonist (versus placebo Rate ratio: 0.76 [0.68, 0.84], three studies, versus beta-agonist, Rate ratio: 0.85 [0.77, 0.95], three studies), but not when compared with steroid. The clinical impact of this effect depends on the frequency of exacerbations experienced by patients. One full exacerbation was prevented for every two to four years of treatment in the type of patients included in the trials. Quality of Life: There were conflicting findings in quality of life and symptoms when fluticasone/salmeterol was compared with inhaled steroids alone (three studies). There was no significant difference between fluticasone/salmeterol and long-acting beta-agonist in quality of life scores (three studies). Budesonide/formoterol improved symptoms when compared with budesonide but not with formoterol. There were conflicting findings in quality of life scores when budesonide/formoterol was compared with component inhaled corticosteroid or beta-agonist. These may be accounted for by different study design. Lung Function: Treatment with either combination led to small, significant differences in lung function compared with component steroid medication. Fluticasone/salmeterol led to small improvements in FEV1 compared with salmeterol, but budesonide/formoterol treatment did not increase FEV1 significantly when compared with formoterol.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, combination therapy led to clinically meaningful differences in quality of life, symptoms and exacerbations. However, there were conflicting results when the different combination therapies were compared with the mono-components alone. In order to draw firmer conclusions about the effects of combination therapy in a single inhaler more data are necessary, including the assessment of the comparative effects with separate administration of the two drugs in double-dummy trials.