Muhasaparur G Rajanandh1, Arcot D Nageswari2, Kaliappan Ilango3. 1. Department of Pharmacy Practice, SRM College of Pharmacy, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. Interdisciplinary School of Indian System of Medicine, SRM University, Tamil Nadu, India. Electronic address: ilangok67@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no comparative study among asthma patients receiving first-line versus various second-line treatment regimens for mild to moderate persistent asthma. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the pulmonary function in asthma patients receivingmontelukast, doxofylline, and tiotropium with budesonide in a pilot group. METHODS: Patients were recruited as per the study criteria and randomly allocated to 4 groups to receive budesonide (400 µg) with formoterol (12 µg), doxofylline (400 mg), montelukast (10 mg), or tiotropium (18 µg) for a period of 3 months. Outcomes included forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and rescue medication use. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients were recruited; among them, 123 patients completed the study. At baseline, no significant difference (P > 0.05) was observed in any of the outcome measures. Significant within-group improvement in FEV1 was observed in all the groups. At day 90, between-group difference revealed that improvement in FEV1 was significantly (P < 0.05) high for budesonide plus formoterol followed by budesonide plus doxofylline, budesonide plus montelukast, and, lastly, budesonide plus tiotropium. Similarly, within-group comparison revealed a significant (P < 0.05) reduction in rescue medication use in all the groups. The intensity in decrease was more in budesonide plus formoterol group followed by budesonide plus doxofylline, budesonide plus montelukast, and budesonide plus tiotropium groups. CONCLUSION: On the basis of our findings, among the second-line treatment regimens, budesonide plus doxofylline and budesonide plus montelukast was found to be better than budesonide plus tiotropium in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Further studies with a larger sample size are likely to be useful.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: There is no comparative study among asthmapatients receiving first-line versus various second-line treatment regimens for mild to moderate persistent asthma. OBJECTIVE: We assessed the pulmonary function in asthmapatients receiving montelukast, doxofylline, and tiotropium with budesonide in a pilot group. METHODS:Patients were recruited as per the study criteria and randomly allocated to 4 groups to receive budesonide (400 µg) with formoterol (12 µg), doxofylline (400 mg), montelukast (10 mg), or tiotropium (18 µg) for a period of 3 months. Outcomes included forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and rescue medication use. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients were recruited; among them, 123 patients completed the study. At baseline, no significant difference (P > 0.05) was observed in any of the outcome measures. Significant within-group improvement in FEV1 was observed in all the groups. At day 90, between-group difference revealed that improvement in FEV1 was significantly (P < 0.05) high for budesonide plus formoterol followed by budesonide plus doxofylline, budesonide plus montelukast, and, lastly, budesonide plus tiotropium. Similarly, within-group comparison revealed a significant (P < 0.05) reduction in rescue medication use in all the groups. The intensity in decrease was more in budesonide plus formoterol group followed by budesonide plus doxofylline, budesonide plus montelukast, and budesonide plus tiotropium groups. CONCLUSION: On the basis of our findings, among the second-line treatment regimens, budesonide plus doxofylline and budesonide plus montelukast was found to be better than budesonide plus tiotropium in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Further studies with a larger sample size are likely to be useful.
Authors: Diana M Sobieraj; William L Baker; Elaine Nguyen; Erin R Weeda; Craig I Coleman; C Michael White; Stephen C Lazarus; Kathryn V Blake; Jason E Lang Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-04-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michelle M Cloutier; Alan P Baptist; Kathryn V Blake; Edward G Brooks; Tyra Bryant-Stephens; Emily DiMango; Anne E Dixon; Kurtis S Elward; Tina Hartert; Jerry A Krishnan; Robert F Lemanske; Daniel R Ouellette; Wilson D Pace; Michael Schatz; Neil S Skolnik; James W Stout; Stephen J Teach; Craig A Umscheid; Colin G Walsh Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 10.793