Comparison of dose-response effects of inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate and budesonide in the management of asthma. Evaluation of different inhaled combination therapies (EDICT): a randomised, double-blind comparison of Seretide (50/250 microg bd Diskus vs. formoterol (12 microg bd) and budesonide (800 microg bd) given concurrently (both via Turbuhaler) in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma. Improved safety with equivalent asthma control in adults with chronic severe asthma on high-dose fluticasone propionate. Clinical efficacy of budesonide Turbuhaler compared with that of beclomethasone dipropionate pMDI with volumatic spacer. A 2-year randomized study in 102 asthma patients. A blinded comparison of fluticasone propionate with budesonide via powder devices in adult patients with moderate-to-severe asthma: a clinical evaluation. A comparison of double-strength beclomethasone dipropionate (84 microg) MDI with beclomethasone dipropionate (42 microg) MDI in the treatment of asthma. A randomized, controlled trial of high dose, inhaled budesonide versus oral prednisone in patients discharged from the emergency department following an acute asthma exacerbation. The effect of high-dose fluticasone propionate and budesonide on lung function and asthma exacerbations in patients with severe asthma. Efficacy and safety of high-dose inhaled steroids in children with asthma: a comparison of fluticasone propionate with budesonide.
The dose-response effects of inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) and budesonide (BUD) administered b.i.d. with the aid of metered dose aerosols were studied in 128 patients (67 men and 61 women, mean age 53 years) suffering from asthma bronchiale. The study was designed as a multi-centre, double-blind, four-period cross-over study, followed by a single-blind double placebo period. BDP was administered in doses of 400 and 1000 micrograms, and BUD in doses of 400 and 800 micrograms. The results in terms of peak expiratory flow (PEF) in the morning and evening, daily symptoms score and use of inhaled beta 2-agonists did not reveal any clinically significant differences between the drugs or between high (800 micrograms BUD, 1000 micrograms BDP) and low (400 micrograms BUD/BDP) doses. However, statistically significant differences were recorded for the corresponding parameters when comparing the placebo with preceding steroid periods. Adverse effects consisting mainly of oropharyngeal candidiasis, hoarseness and cough occurred in 54 of 468 treatment months (12%). The carry-over effects of inhaled steroids are longer lasting than was previously assumed. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy safety and cost of Seretide (salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (Salm/FP), 50/250 microg bd) via Diskus with formoterol (Form; 12 microg bd) and budesonide (Bud; 800 microg bd) given concurrently (Form+Bud) via Turbuhaler in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma who were uncontrolled on existing corticosteroid therapy. The study used a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group design, consisting of a 2-week run-in period on current corticosteroid therapy (1000-1600 microg/day of BDP or equivalent) and a 12-week treatment period. Symptomatic patients (n = 428) with FEV1 of 50-85% predicted and increased symptom scores or reliever use during run-in were randomly allocated to receive either Salm/FP (50/250 microg bd) via a single Diskus inhaleror Form+Bud (12+800 microg bd) via separate Turbuhalers. Clinic, diary card and asthma-related health-care resource utilisation data were collected. Improvement in mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEFam was similar in the Salm/FP and Form+Bud groups. Both PEFam and mean evening PEF (PEFpm) increased by a clinically significant amount (>20 L/min) from baseline in both treatment groups. The mean rate of exacerbations (mild, moderate or severe) was significantly lower in the Salm/FP group (0.472) compared with the Form+Bud group (0.735) (ratio = 0.64; P < 0.001), despite the three-fold lower microgram inhaled corticosteroid dose in the Salm/FP group. Patients in the Salm/FP group also experienced significantly fewer nocturnal symptoms, with a higher median percentage of symptom-free nights (P = 0.04), nights with a symptom score <2 (P = 0.03), and nights with no awakenings (P = 0.02). Total asthma-related health-care costs were significantly lower in the Salm/FP group than the Form+Bud group (P<0.05). Both treatments were well tolerated, with a similar low incidence of adverse events. This study showed that in symptomatic patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, Salm/FP (50/250 microg bd), administered in a single convenient device (Diskus), was at least as effective as an approximately three-fold higher microgram corticosteroid dose of Bud (800 microg bd) given concurrently with Form (12 microg bd) in terms of improvement in PEFam, and superior at reducing exacerbations and nights with symptoms or night-time awakenings. Salm/FP was also the less costly treatment due primarily to lower hospitalisation and drug costs. High-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have been associated with the same side-effects as oral corticosteroids. Beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) and budesonide (BUD) in doses greater than 2000 microg/day are used regularly in severe asthma, despite the fact that safety and efficacy data at such high doses are limited. Fluticasone propionate (FP) has been promoted as being twice as potent clinically as BDP or BUD at doses of 2000 microg/day or less with a similar safety profile. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of FP with BDP and BUD in 133 symptomatic adult asthmatics requiring at least 1750 microg/day of BDP or BUD.
                Patients fulfilling the entry criteria were randomized to receive either their regular ICS medication or FP at approximately half the microgram dose for 6 months in an open, parallel group study. The primary efficacy measure was based on morning peak expiratory flow measurements recorded by patients on daily record cards, while determination of safety was based on a number of endpoints including changes in bone turnover indices, the incidence of topical side-effects and assessments of quality of life.
                It was shown that patients who were switched to FP, but not those continuing with BDP or BUD, had significant increases in levels of morning serum cortisol and the urine cortisol:creatinine ratio while maintaining asthma control. Serum osteocalcin and the pyridinoline:creatinine ratio, as well as the deoxypyridinoline:creatinine ratio, were also shown to increase only in the FP group. Subjective assessments such as quality of life score, the incidence and ease of bruising, and reports of hoarseness also favoured the FP group.
                It is concluded that, at the doses studied and with the delivery devices used clinically, FP is at least as effective as BDP/BUD in the management of severe asthma and may offer clinical advantages with respect to steroid-related adverse effects. A total of 102 patients had their asthma treatment with beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) optimized in order to achieve the best possible control of symptoms. Thereafter, the BDP doses were gradually reduced over a 2-year period (1988-90) to the lowest possible without deterioration of their asthmatic condition. In the beginning of 1990, treatment was changed in 76 patients (group A) to the nearest possible dose of budesonide delivered via Turbuhaler. Twenty-six randomly selected patients (25% of the study population; group B) continued treatment with BDP. In both groups, dose reductions were tried during 1990-2 every third month as long as the patients remained symptom-free and without significant decreases in FEV1 or PEF. In group A, the maintenance dose could be reduced from 1003.9 +/- 325.4 micrograms BDP (mean +/- SD) to 602.9 +/- 454.4 micrograms budesonide Turbuhaler (P < 0.001). In group B, no significant dose reduction was possible; the mean dose was +/- SD 1067.3 +/- 36.6 micrograms in 1990, and 1019.2 +/- 324.7 micrograms in 1992. The results indicate that, in efficacy, 0.6 mg budesonide Turbuhaler corresponds to approximately 1.0 mg BDP with volumatic spacer. This difference is probably due to an improved pulmonary delivery of budesonide with Turbuhaler. In Vitro and in vivo data have demonstrated that there are detectable differences between inhaled corticosteroids commonly used to treat asthma. However, controversy still remains as to whether these differences translate into clinical benefits. This 12-week, international, randomized, doubleblind, parallel-group study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate (FP) 800 mug daily, administered as a powder via the Diskhaler((R)), and budesonide (BUD) 1600 mug daily, administered using the Turbuhaler((R)), in adult patients with moderate-tosevere asthma. A total of 518 patients participated in the study, 256 of whom received FP and 262 BUD. Assessment of mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) over the 12-week treatment period revealed a statistically significant difference in efficacy between FP 800 mug daily and BUD 1600 mug daily in favour of FP (p = 0.003), with an overall improvement of 20.9 l/min with FP compared with 12.4 l/min on BUD. Statistically significant differences in favour of FP were seen over the 12 weeks for mean evening PEF (p = 0.04), diurnal PEF variation (p = 0.03) and percentage predicted PEF (p = 0.003), as well as forced expiratory volume (p = 0.008), forced vital capacity (p = 0.02) and PEF (p = 0.005) measured at clinic visits. The median percentage of symptom-free nights increased over the 12-week study period in both treatment groups, with similar changes seen for the median percentage of days with symptom score < 2, rescue medication use and exacerbations of asthma. The incidence of adverse events was found to be comparable in the two treatment groups. The geometric mean ratios of serum cortisol levels were found to be 1.03 for FP, indicating no mean hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression from baseline, and 0.93 for BUD (p = 0.0002 compared with FP). In summary, FP 800 mug daily showed a greater efficacy/safety ratio in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma than BUD 1600 mug daily. To compare the efficacy and safety of a double-strength formulation of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP 84) metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with that of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP 42) MDI in the treatment of chronic asthma.
                A 28-day, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, multicenter study.
                Outpatient.
                A total of 423 patients aged 12 to 65 years (mean range, 34 to 36 years) with moderate asthma (FEV1, 50 to 80% of predicted) who required long-term inhaled corticosteroids were enrolled.
                Patients were randomized to receive BDP 84, two oral inhalations bid (336 microg/d), BDP 42, four oral inhalations bid (336 microg/d), or placebo. A fourth treatment arm administering BDP 84, eight oral inhalations bid (HD BDP 84; 1,344 microg/d) was also included to determine whether a dose-response relationship could be demonstrated.
                Spirometry, clinical observations.
                The three active treatments were significantly more effective (p < or = 0.01) than placebo at all time points in improving FEV1, the primary efficacy parameter; BDP 42 and BDP 84 were comparable to each other at every time point. Secondary pulmonary function tests (FVC, forced expiratory flow at 25 to 75% of FVC, and peak expiratory flow rate) showed similar results. All three active treatments were well tolerated. A dose response between 336 microg/d and 1,344 microg/d was demonstrated.
                In this well-controlled 28-day study, BDP 42 and BDP 84 were shown to be comparable in efficacy and safety on a microgram-for-microgram basis. Prednisone (PRED) is recommended at discharge to reduce the relapse rate following emergency treatment for an asthmatic attack. However, PRED has systemic side effects. Inhaled anti-inflammatory medications, such as budesonide (BUD), are well tolerated. This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of PRED and BUD on relapse rate.
                A prospective, randomized, double-blind, double dummy, parallel group design.
                Tertiary referral emergency departments.
                One hundred and eighty-five patients with acute asthma who received standard treatment with bronchodilators and systemic glucocorticosteroids in the emergency department, had a forced expiration volume in 1 s (FEV1) greater than 50% predicted and who were deemed well enough to be discharged from the emergency department.
                Patients were randomized to receive either BUD Turbuhaler 600 microg qid or PRED 40 mg in the morning for seven to 10 days. At discharge and final visit, symptoms, medication use, FEV1, peak expiratory flow (PEF) and quality of life (QoL) were assessed. Relapse rate to the emergency department during the follow-up was determined by a yes and/or no questionnaire.
                The PRED (n=85) and BUD (n=90) treatment groups were comparable at baseline (emergency department discharge) for age (mean +/- SD; 27.6+/-8.5 years and 29. 2+/-8.7 years) and prebronchodilator FEV1 (1.77+/-0.79 L and 1. 75+/-0.78 L), respectively. BUD was at least as effective as PRED in preventing a relapse to the hospital; relapse rate was 10 (11.8%) during PRED treatment and nine (10.0%) for BUD treatment (95% CI PRED-BUD, -7.5% to 11.0%). Improvements in FEV1, asthma symptoms, PEF and QoL were not significantly different between treatments.
                In patients whose acute asthma has been stabilized in the emergency department, high dose BUD may be an alternate to PRED as a follow-up treatment. The purpose of this study was to investigate the comparative efficacy and safety of equal doses of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP) and inhaled budesonide (BUD) using their respective dry powder inhalers in a population of severe asthmatics requiring high doses of inhaled corticosteroid. This double-blind double-dummy parallel-group study compared the effects of 24 weeks of treatment with FP (2000 micrograms daily via a Diskhaler inhaler; Glaxo Wellcome, Evreux, France) and BUD (2000 micrograms daily via a Turbuhaler inhaler; Astra Pharmaceuticals, Rijswijka, Netherlands) on lung function and asthma exacerbations in 395 patients with asthma. FP was statistically significantly superior to BUD with respect to the percentage of symptom-free days (P = 0.02), the incidence of days free from rescue bronchodilator usage (P = 0.02) and the distribution of change in peak expiratory flow (PEF) expressed as a percentage of the predicted PEF (P = 0.04). During the treatment period FP was statistically significantly superior to BUD for change in forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) at 8, 16 and 24 weeks, change in the median daytime symptom score during weeks 5-16, for incidence of symptom-free days and incidence of days free from rescue bronchodilator usage during weeks 17-24. There was no significant difference between FP and BUD with respect to the number of patients experiencing one or more asthma exacerbation (33.8 and 28.4% of patients, respectively). There was, however, evidence that the exacerbations were clinically less severe in patients treated with FP, in that the time to resolution was quicker (11.0 vs. 14.7 days; P = 0.035), mean duration of all exacerbations (for an individual patient) tended to be shorter (18.5 vs. 23.6 days; P = 0.12), the time off work was reduced (4.2 vs. 7.6 days; P = 0.012) and the lowest PEF recorded during the exacerbation was higher (301 vs. 263 l min-1; P = 0.07). There were no clinically relevant differences in the safety (serum cortisol levels, markers of bone turnover, adverse events) of FP and BUD at these microgram equivalent doses. The patients recruited into this study, in retrospect, probably had no need for such high doses of inhaled corticosteroid but, irrespective of this, FP at microgram equivalent doses showed evidence of superior efficacy to BUD with respect to lung function and severity of asthma exacerbations without producing any greater adverse systemic effect. To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP), 400 microgram/d, with those of budesonide (BUD), 800 microgram/d, in children with moderate to severe asthma.
                Three hundred thirty-three children, ages 4 to 12 years, receiving inhaled corticosteroids were enrolled in a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, parallel-group study. After a 2-week run-in phase, 166 children received FP and 167 received BUD for 20 weeks. The primary outcome variable was mean morning peak expiratory flow; the 2 treatments were to be regarded as equivalent if the 90% CI for the treatment difference was within +/- 15 L/min. Pulmonary function, height, and diary cards were assessed at each visit; and morning serum cortisol levels were determined before and after treatment.
                Baseline peak expiratory flow was similar, FP 236 +/- 72 (SD) L/min and BUD 229 +/- 74, increasing after treatment to 277 +/- 41 and 257 +/- 28, a difference between treatments of 12 L/min (90% CI 6-19 L/min; P =.002). Symptom control and use of rescue medication were the same. Cortisol levels after treatment were 199 nmol/L (FP) and 183 nmol/L (BUD) (treatment ratio = 1.09; 90% CI 0.98-1.21; P =.172). Linear growth was less in those receiving BUD (mean difference, 6.2 mm; 95% CI 2.9-9.6; P =.0003).
                FP at half the dose was superior to BUD in improving peak expiratory flow and comparable in controlling symptoms. Growth was reduced with BUD compared with FP, but there was no difference in serum cortisol suppression or hepatic or renal function.
There is limited high quality randomised controlled trial data comparing the relative efficacy of BDP and BUD. Current guidelines (BTS 1997; GINA 1995; NHLBI 1997) assume BDP and BUD to have equal efficacy, such that for each defined level of asthma severity, the recommended doses BDP and BUD are the same. Although there is some data to suggest that BUD via Turbohaler is more effective than BDP via either Rotahaler or MDI (with and without spacer), these comparisons are confounded by use of different delivery devices, and are not sufficient to warrant a change in guideline recommendations.