A 12-week, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Proof-of-Concept Study of Tulobuterol Patch and Salmeterol Inhaler as Add-on Therapy in Adult-Onset Mild-to-Moderate Asthma.

Related Articles

A 12-week, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Proof-of-Concept Study of Tulobuterol Patch and Salmeterol Inhaler as Add-on Therapy in Adult-Onset Mild-to-Moderate Asthma.

Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2016 Oct 8;:

Authors: Inoue H, Niimi A, Matsumoto H, Ito I, Oguma T, Otsuka K, Takeda T, Nakaji H, Tajiri T, Iwata T, Nagasaki T, Mishima M

Abstract
Patch formulation of tulobuterol has been used in asthma treatment as a long-acting ?2 -agonist (LABA) through sustained skin absorption. Its treatment efficacy, especially in small airways, remains poorly understood. The study aim was to investigate LABA add-on effects of tulobuterol patch (TP) and salmeterol inhaler (SA) on pulmonary function, asthma control, and health status. Patients who had adult-onset under-controlled asthma, despite taking inhaled corticosteroids, were enrolled in a randomized, open-label, parallel-group, proof-of-concept study of 12-week add-on treatment with TP (n = 16) or SA (n = 17). Spirometry, impulse oscillometry (IOS), exhaled nitric oxide levels, and clinical questionnaires of asthma control, health status (St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire: SGRQ), and symptoms were evaluated every 4 weeks. Add-on treatment of SA significantly improved the spirometric indices of small airway obstruction (forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC: FEF25-75 , and maximum expiratory flow at 25% of FVC: MEF25 ) and IOS indices of whole respiratory resistance (resistance at 5 Hz) as compared to TP. In intra-group comparisons, add-on treatment of TP improved the scores of the asthma control test and the total SGRQ, as well as the symptom and impact components of the SGRQ. SA add-on treatment improved FEV1 and IOS parameters of resistance at 20 Hz and reactance at 5 Hz. Neither of the treatments improved exhaled nitric oxide levels. In conclusion, add-on treatment of TP improved asthma control and health status, whereas SA improved pulmonary function measures associated with large and small airway involvement among patients with adult-onset mild-to-moderate asthma. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

PMID: 27718262 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

View full post on pubmed: asthma

Why use long acting bronchodilators in chronic obstructive lung diseases? An extensive review on formoterol and salmeterol.

Why use long acting bronchodilators in chronic obstructive lung diseases? An extensive review on formoterol and salmeterol.

Eur J Intern Med. 2015 Jun 3;

Authors: Santus P, Radovanovic D, Paggiaro P, Papi A, Sanduzzi A, Scichilone N, Braido F

Abstract
Long-acting ?2-adrenoceptor agonists, formoterol and salmeterol, represent a milestone in the treatments of chronic obstructive lung diseases. Although no specific indications concerning the choice of one molecule rather than another are provided by asthma and COPD guidelines, they present different pharmacological properties resulting in distinct clinical employment possibilities. In particular, salmeterol has a low intrinsic efficacy working as a partial receptor agonist, while formoterol is a full agonist with high intrinsic efficacy. From a clinical perspective, in the presence of low ?2-adrenoceptors availability, like in inflamed airways, a full agonist can maintain its bronchodilatory and non-smooth muscle activities while a partial agonist may be less effective. Furthermore, formoterol presents a faster onset of action than salmeterol. This phenomenon, combined with the molecule safety profile, leads to a prompt amelioration of the symptoms, and allows using this drug in asthma as an “as needed” treatment in patients already on regular treatment. The fast onset of action and the full agonism of formoterol need to be considered in order to select the best pharmacological treatment of asthma and COPD.

PMID: 26049917 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

View full post on pubmed: asthma

Comparison of Salmeterol and Fluticasone Propionate Absorption From Salmeterol/Fluticasone Easyhaler With Seretide Diskus

Condition:   Asthma
Interventions:   Drug: Seretide Diskus and charcoal;   Drug: Seretide Diskus;   Drug: SF Easyhaler and charcoal;   Drug: SF Easyhaler
Sponsors:   Orion Corporation, Orion Pharma;   Orion Corporation, Orion Pharma
Recruiting – verified May 2013

View full post on ClinicalTrials.gov: asthma | received in the last 14 days

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

Related Articles

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

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;10:CD010005

Authors: Cates CJ, Oleszczuk M, Stovold E, Wieland LS

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Two large surveillance studies in adults with asthma have found an increased risk of asthma-related mortality in those who took regular salmeterol as monotherapy in comparison to placebo or regular salbutamol. No similar sized surveillance studies have been carried out in children with asthma, and we remain uncertain about the comparative safety of regular combination therapy with either formoterol or salmeterol in children with asthma.
OBJECTIVES: We have used the paediatric trial results from Cochrane systematic reviews to assess the safety of regular formoterol or salmeterol, either as monotherapy or as combination therapy, in children with asthma.
METHODS: We included Cochrane reviews relating to the safety of regular formoterol and salmeterol from a search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews conducted in May 2012, and ran updated searches for each of the reviews. These were independently assessed. All the reviews were assessed for quality using the AMSTAR tool. We extracted the data relating to children from each review and from new trials found in the updated searches (including risks of bias, study characteristics, serious adverse event outcomes, and control arm event rates).The safety of regular formoterol and salmeterol were assessed directly from the paediatric trials in the Cochrane reviews of monotherapy and combination therapy with each product. Then monotherapy was indirectly compared to combination therapy by looking at the differences between the pooled trial results for monotherapy and the pooled results for combination therapy. The comparative safety of formoterol and salmeterol was assessed using direct evidence from trials that randomised children to each treatment; this was combined with the result of an indirect comparison of the combination therapy trials, which represents the difference between the pooled results of each product when randomised against inhaled corticosteroids alone.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified six high quality, up to date Cochrane reviews. Four of these related to the safety of regular formoterol or salmeterol (as monotherapy or combination therapy) and these included 19 studies in children. We added data from two recent studies on salmeterol combination therapy in 689 children which were published after the relevant Cochrane review had been completed, making a total of 21 trials on 7474 children (from four to 17 years of age). The two remaining reviews compared the safety of formoterol with salmeterol from trials randomising participants to one or other treatment, but the reviews only included a single trial in children in which there were 156 participants.Only one child died across all the trials, so impact on mortality could not be assessed.We found a statistically significant increase in the odds of suffering a non-fatal serious adverse event of any cause in children on formoterol monotherapy (Peto odds ratio (OR) 2.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 4.83, I(2) = 0%, 5 trials, N = 1335, high quality) and smaller increases in odds which were not statistically significant for salmeterol monotherapy (Peto OR 1.30; 95% CI 0.82 to 2.05, I(2) = 17%, 5 trials, N = 1333, moderate quality), formoterol combination therapy (Peto OR 1.60; 95% CI 0.80 to 3.28, I(2) = 32%, 7 trials, N = 2788, moderate quality) and salmeterol combination therapy (Peto OR 1.20; 95% CI 0.37 to 2.91, I(2) = 0%, 5 trials, N = 1862, moderate quality).We compared the pooled results of the monotherapy and combination therapy trials. There was no significant difference between the pooled ORs of children with a serious adverse event (SAE) from long-acting beta(2)-agonist beta agonist (LABA) monotherapy (Peto OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.10 to 2.33, 10 trials, N = 2668) and combination trials (Peto OR 1.50; 95% CI 0.82 to 2.75, 12 trials, N = 4,650). However, there were fewer children with an SAE in the regular inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) control group (0.7%) than in the placebo control group (3.6%). As a result, there was an absolute increase of an additional 21 children (95% CI 4 to 45) suffering such an SAE of any cause for every 1000 children treated over six months with either regular formoterol or salmeterol monotherapy, whilst for combination therapy the increased risk was an additional three children (95% CI 1 fewer to 12 more) per 1000 over three months.We only found a single trial in 156 children comparing the safety of regular salmeterol to regular formoterol monotherapy, and even with the additional evidence from indirect comparisons between the combination formoterol and salmeterol trials, the CI around the effect on SAEs is too wide to tell whether there is a difference in the comparative safety of formoterol and salmeterol (OR 1.26; 95% CI 0.37 to 4.32).
AUTHORS’ CONCLUSIONS: We do not know if regular combination therapy with formoterol or salmeterol in children alters the risk of dying from asthma.Regular combination therapy is likely to be less risky than monotherapy in children with asthma, but we cannot say that combination therapy is risk free. There are probably an additional three children per 1000 who suffer a non-fatal serious adverse event on combination therapy in comparison to ICS over three months. This is currently our best estimate of the risk of using LABA combination therapy in children and has to be balanced against the symptomatic benefit obtained for each child. We await the results of large on-going surveillance studies to further clarify the risks of combination therapy in children and adolescents with asthma.The relative safety of formoterol in comparison to salmeterol remains unclear, even when all currently available direct and indirect trial evidence is combined.

PMID: 23076961 [PubMed – in process]

View full post on pubmed: asthma

Evaluation of Tiotropium 2.5 and 5 Mcg Once Daily Delivered Via the Respimat® Inhaler Compared to Placebo and Salmeterol HydroFluoroAlkane (HFA) Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI) (50 Mcg Twice Daily) in Patient With Moderate Persistent Asthma II

Condition:   Asthma
Interventions:   Drug: 50 mcg salmeterol HFA MDI;   Drug: placebo;   Drug: 5 mcg tiotropium Respimat®;   Drug: 2.5 mcg tiotropium Respimat®
Sponsors:   Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals;   Pfizer
Recruiting – verified September 2010

View full post on ClinicalTrials.gov: “Asthma” | updated in the last 30 days