Comparable efficacy of ciclesonide once daily versus fluticasone propionate twice daily in asthma. Efficacy and safety of ciclesonide once daily and fluticasone propionate twice daily in children with asthma. Ciclesonide is more effective than budesonide in the treatment of persistent asthma. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of ciclesonide 160 microg once daily vs. budesonide 400 microg once daily in children with asthma. Comparative efficacy of once-daily ciclesonide and budesonide in the treatment of persistent asthma. Randomized comparison of the efficacy and safety of ciclesonide and budesonide in adolescents with severe asthma. Similar efficacy of ciclesonide once daily versus fluticasone propionate twice daily in patients with persistent asthma. Effect of ciclesonide and fluticasone on exhaled nitric oxide in patients with mild allergic asthma. A multinational, 12-week, randomized study comparing the efficacy and tolerability of ciclesonide and budesonide in patients with asthma.
Inhaled corticosteroids are the mainstay of therapy in asthma, but local and systemic side effects and adherence remain a concern. Ciclesonide is an inhaled corticosteroid with on-site lung activation that provides potent anti-inflammatory activity and has been shown to have a good safety profile, even at high doses.
                The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily ciclesonide versus twice-daily fluticasone propionate at comparable daily doses in patients with asthma.
                In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group study, 529 patients were randomized to ciclesonide 160 microg once daily or fluticasone propionate 88 microg twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in lung function.
                Both ciclesonide and fluticasone propionate significantly improved forced expiratory volume in 1s, forced vital capacity, and morning peak expiratory flow compared with baseline (p<0.0001 for all variables). Both medications reduced asthma symptoms and rescue medication use within the first 24 h. At the tested dose, both medications were equally safe and well tolerated.
                Ciclesonide 160 microg once daily was as effective as fluticasone propionate 88 microg twice daily in improving lung function and asthma symptoms, and in reducing rescue medication use in patients with asthma. Ciclesonide is a new inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). Information about its clinical efficacy and safety in relation to other ICS in children is needed for clinical positioning.
                This 12-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, three-arm, parallel-group study compared the efficacy and safety of ciclesonide with fluticasone propionate in children with mainly moderate and severe persistent asthma.
                Seven hundred and forty-four patients (aged 6-11 years) were randomized to ciclesonide (80 or 160 microg once daily) or fluticasone propionate (88 microg twice daily), following a 2-4-week run-in. Efficacy measurements included forced expiratory flow in 1s (FEV(1)), morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptom scores, rescue medication use and quality of life. Systemic effect was assessed by 24-hour urine free cortisol adjusted for creatinine.
                FEV(1) and morning PEF increased from baseline in all groups (p<0.0001). Ciclesonide 160 microg was not inferior to fluticasone propionate 176 microg for FEV(1) (p=0.0030, one-sided). In all groups, asthma symptom score sums and rescue medication use significantly improved (p<0.0001). The percentages of asthma symptom-, rescue medication- and nocturnal awakening-free days were high, with no significant differences between treatments. Quality of life scores improved with all treatments (p<0.0001). A significant dose-response occurred between low and higher doses of ciclesonide for exacerbations and asthma control definitions. The incidences of adverse events were comparable across treatments. Urine free cortisol levels decreased significantly with fluticasone propionate (p=0.0103), but not with ciclesonide.
                Once-daily ciclesonide has a clinical effect similar to that of fluticasone propionate, but does not suppress cortisol excretion, in children with moderate and severe asthma. Ciclesonide is a lung-activated inhaled corticosteroid that provides effective control of persistent asthma. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily ciclesonide versus once-daily budesonide in patients with asthma.
                A total of 399 patients with asthma were randomised to receive once-daily ciclesonide 320 microg ex-actuator (equivalent to 400 microg ex-valve) or once-daily budesonide 400 microg for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV(1)). Additional efficacy variables included forced vital capacity (FVC), peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms, use of rescue medication and time to onset of effect. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study.
                Both ciclesonide and budesonide significantly increased FEV(1) from baseline (416 and 321 ml, respectively; p<0.0001). The increase in FEV(1) was significantly greater in ciclesonide-treated patients (95% confidence interval: 0.016-0.174; p=0.019 versus budesonide). Similarly, ciclesonide and budesonide significantly improved FVC and PEF from baseline (p<0.0001), and significantly greater increases occurred with ciclesonide (p=0.034 and 0.019 versus budesonide, respectively). Analysis of morning PEF revealed an earlier onset of action for ciclesonide versus budesonide; a significant improvement was seen by day 2 (p=0.039 versus baseline) with ciclesonide compared with day 7 for budesonide (p=0.047 versus baseline). Adverse events occurred with a similar incidence in both treatment groups. Neither treatment caused significant changes in urinary cortisol levels.
                Once-daily ciclesonide was more effective than once-daily budesonide in improving FEV(1), FVC and PEF. Ciclesonide also had an earlier onset of action than budesonide in patients with persistent asthma. Both ciclesonide and budesonide had good safety and tolerability profiles. Ciclesonide is an onsite-activated inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for the treatment of asthma. This study compared the efficacy, safety and effect on quality of life (QOL) of ciclesonide 160 microg (ex-actuator; nominal dose 200 microg) vs. budesonide 400 microg (nominal dose) in children with asthma. Six hundred and twenty-one children (aged 6-11 yr) with asthma were randomized to receive ciclesonide 160 microg (ex-actuator) once daily (via hydrofluoroalkane metered-dose inhaler and AeroChamber Plus spacer) or budesonide 400 microg once daily (via Turbohaler) both given in the evening for 12 wk. The primary efficacy end-point was change in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1). Additional measurements included change in daily peak expiratory flow (PEF), change in asthma symptom score sum, change in use of rescue medication, paediatric and caregiver asthma QOL questionnaire [PAQLQ(S) and PACQLQ, respectively] scores, change in body height assessed by stadiometry, change in 24-h urinary cortisol adjusted for creatinine and adverse events. Both ciclesonide and budesonide increased FEV1, morning PEF and PAQLQ(S) and PACQLQ scores, and improved asthma symptom score sums and the need for rescue medication after 12 wk vs. baseline. The non-inferiority of ciclesonide vs. budesonide was demonstrated for the change in FEV1 (95% confidence interval: -75, 10 ml, p = 0.0009, one-sided non-inferiority, per-protocol). In addition, ciclesonide and budesonide showed similar efficacy in improving asthma symptoms, morning PEF, use of rescue medication and QOL. Ciclesonide was superior to budesonide with regard to increases in body height (p = 0.003, two-sided). The effect on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis was significantly different in favor of ciclesonide treatment (p < 0.001, one-sided). Both ciclesonide and budesonide were well tolerated. Ciclesonide 160 microg once daily and budesonide 400 microg once daily were effective in children with asthma. In addition, in children treated with ciclesonide there was significantly less reduction in body height and suppression of 24-h urinary cortisol excretion compared with children treated with budesonide after 12 wk. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily ciclesonide, a new-generation, on-site-activated, inhaled corticosteroid, with once-daily budesonide in persistent asthma.
                Eligible patients requiring budesonide or equivalent 320-640 microg (ex-mouthpiece, equivalent to 400-800 microg; Turbohalertrade mark) daily entered a 2-week baseline, and then a 2- to 4-week pretreatment period (budesonide 1280 microg/day; ex-mouthpiece, equivalent to 1600 microg/day). Patients with an increase in forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) of 7% or 0.15 L were randomised to ciclesonide 320 microg (ex-actuator, equivalent to 400 microg ex-valve) via a hydrofluoroalkane-metered dose inhaler (HFA-MDI) without a spacer or budesonide 320 microg once daily in the morning for 12 weeks. Change in FEV1 was the primary endpoint.
                In all, 359 patients were randomised. The FEV1 and forced vital capacity (FVC) decreased by 0.18 and 0.12L, respectively, in the ciclesonide group, and by 0.23 and 0.21L in the budesonide group. For FEV1, ciclesonide was noninferior and numerically superior to budesonide. For FVC, ciclesonide was statistically superior to budesonide (P=0.010). Asthma symptom scores were comparable; the median percentage of symptom-free days was significantly higher for ciclesonide (43.6%) versus budesonide (25.8%) (P=0.017). Rescue medication use decreased significantly only for ciclesonide patients (P=0.009). Frequency of adverse events was low in both groups.
                Ciclesonide 320 microg once daily by HFA-MDI without a spacer was at least as effective as budesonide 320 microg once daily in persistent asthma. The aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of ciclesonide compared with budesonide in adolescents with severe asthma.
                In this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study, patients aged 12-17 years with severe asthma were treated with budesonide 400 microg once daily (QD) in a 2-week run-in period. At randomization, eligible patients were assigned 2:1 to ciclesonide 320 microg QD (ex-actuator) or budesonide 800 microg QD (metered dose), respectively, in the evening. Forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV(1)) was the primary variable. Patients recorded asthma symptom score and rescue medication use in diaries. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and 24-h urine cortisol.
                Four hundred and three patients were randomized. Ciclesonide 320 microg QD and budesonide 800 microg QD significantly increased FEV(1) (least-squares mean: 505 and 536 mL, respectively; both p<0.0001 versus baseline) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Lower limits of the 95% confidence intervals (ITT: -138 mL; per-protocol: -122 mL) were above the non-inferiority limit (-150 mL). Median percentage of days without asthma symptoms and without rescue medication use was 84% with ciclesonide and 85% with budesonide. AEs were unremarkable, with no cases of confirmed candidiasis. Median creatinine-adjusted urine cortisol significantly decreased with budesonide treatment (15.9-13.7 nmol cortisol/mmol creatinine; p=0.0086 versus baseline), but not with ciclesonide (p=0.1125).
                Ciclesonide 320 microg QD showed similar efficacy to budesonide 800 microg QD in adolescents with severe asthma. Ciclesonide was well tolerated and, unlike budesonide, had no effect on urine cortisol levels.
                EudraCT No.: 2004-001233-41. This 12-week, double-blind, parallel-group study compared the efficacy and safety of once daily ciclesonide and twice daily fluticasone propionate in patients aged 12-75 years with persistent asthma. Patients were randomized to once-daily ciclesonide 80 micro g (n = 278) or 160 micro g (n = 271), or twice daily fluticasone propionate 88 micro g (n = 259) (all ex-actuator). Significant improvements from baseline were seen in all three treatment groups for forced expiratory volume in 1 second, asthma symptom scores and rescue medication use (all p < 0.0001). Asthma exacerbation rates were low (each ciclesonide group, n = 2; fluticasone group, n = 1). Adverse event reporting indicated good tolerability. Once daily ciclesonide 80 micro g or 160 micro g showed comparable efficacy and tolerability to twice daily fluticasone propionate 88 micro g in persistent asthma. Ciclesonide is a novel, lung-activated, inhaled corticosteroid with once-daily efficacy and potent anti-inflammatory activity. The aim of the study was to compare the effect of ciclesonide and fluticasone propionate on exhaled nitric oxide (FENO), pulmonary function, and other parameters used in clinical evaluation of patients with mild allergic asthma. The study indicates that ciclesonide (in a daily dose of either 80 or 160 microg) induces both a faster and stronger decrease of FENO in comparison with fluticasone (100 microg twice daily). In both groups of patients treated with ciclesonide, the highest decrease in FENO levels was observed after 2 weeks of treatment. In the group of patients treated with fluticasone, this maximum effect was not observed till 8 weeks. An improvement in spirometric indices was observed in all groups studied. Statistical differences between the groups were not found; however, there was a trend toward higher increase in the group receiving 160 microg of ciclesonide. In all groups studied we observed clinical improvement (asthmatic symptoms and consumption of rescue medication were reduced), but there were no significant differences between these groups. Our results indicate that ciclesonide, compared with fluticasone, has stronger anti-inflammatory activity in patients with mild allergic asthma. Ciclesonide is a new lung-activated inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) that has shown efficacy in previous placebo-controlled and comparative studies in patients with persistent asthma. It is important to compare new treatments with existing ICSs to obtain relative data concerning their efficacy and tolerability.
                This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of ciclesonide QD with budesonide BID in patients with asthma.
                This 12-week, randomized study was conducted at 62 study sites across Europe. Male and female patients aged 12 to 75 years with primarily mild to moderate asthma were enrolled. This study was double blind with respect to the ciclesonide dose and open label for budesonide, as placebofor budesonide was not available. Patients were randomly assigned to receive inhaled ciclesonide 80 or 320 microg QD (morning) or budesonide 200 microg BID for 12 weeks. Efficacy and tolerability assessments were performed at weeks 0 (baseline), 4, 8, and 12. The primary end point was the change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at 12 weeks. Secondary end points were changes from baseline in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptom scores, and rescue medication use. Tolerability was assessed throughout the study by monitoring of standard laboratory variables (hematology and biochemistry); physical examination, including vital signs; reporting of adverse events (AEs); and 24-hour urinary cortisol as a measure of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis function.
                Five hundred fifty-four patients were randomized (301 men, 253 women; mean age, 41.3 years; ciclesonide 80 microg QD, 182 patients; ciclesonide 320 microg QD, 195; budesonide 200 microg BID, 177). Demographic and baseline clinical characteristics, including age, sex, weight, and (FEV1) were similar between the 3 groups. Compared with baseline values, week-12 FEV1 (least squares mean [LSM] [SEM] A, +0.267 [0.035], +0.256 [0.033], and +0.355 [0.034] L, respectively; all, P<0.001) and morning PEF (LSM [SEM] Delta, +12 [5], +17 [4], and +21 [4] L/min, respectively; all, P<or=0.008) were significantly improved with ciclesonide 80 and 320 microg QD and budesonide 200 microg BID. At 12 weeks, ciclesonide was found to be noninferior to budesonide with regard to mean changes from baseline in (FEV1) (intent to treat [ITT]: 97.5% CI for ciclesonide 80 microg QD vs budesonide 200 microg BID, -0.192 to 0.015; 97.5 CI for ciclesonide 320 microg QD vs budesonide 200 microg BID, -0.200 to 0.001) and morning PEF (ITT. 97.5% CI for ciclesonide 80 microg QD vs budesonide 200 microg BID, -22 to 5; 97.5% CI for ciclesonide 320 microg QD vs budesonide 200 microg BID, -17 to 10). Similar findings were seen in the per-protocol population. Week-12 daily, daytime, and nighttime asthma symptom scores and rescue medication use were significantly decreased from baseline in all 3 treatment groups (all, P<0.001). The prevalences of AEs were similar across all 3 treatment groups. Week-12 mean urinary cortisol excretion was statistically similar to baseline with both ciclesonide doses (Delta, -0.54 and +0.16 nmol/mmol creatinine with ciclesonide 80 and 320 microg QD, respectively) but was significantly reduced from baseline with budesonide (Delta, -1.42 nmol/mmol creatinine; P<0.05).
                The results of this study in patients with primarily mild to moderate asthma suggest that ciclesonide 80 and 320 microg QD were similar to budesonide 200 microg BID in improving pulmonary function, controlling asthma symptoms, and reducing the need for rescue medication use. Unlike budesonide, ciclesonide was not associated with significant urinary cortisol suppression in these patients.
An improvement in asthma symptoms, exacerbations and side effects of ciclesonide versus budesonide and fluticasone could be neither demonstrated nor refuted and the trade-off between benefits and harms of using ciclesonide instead of budesonide or fluticasone is unclear. The resource use or costs of different ICS should therefore also be considered in final decision making.  
Longer-term superiority trials are needed to identify the usefulness and safety of ciclesonide compared to other ICS. Additionally these studies should be powered for patient relevant outcomes (exacerbations, asthma symptoms, quality of life and side effects). There is a need for studies comparing ciclesonide once daily with other ICS twice daily to assess the advantages of ciclesonide being a pro-drug that can be administered once daily with possibly increased adherence leading to increased control of asthma and fewer side effects.