Muhasaparur Ganesan Rajanandh1, Arcot D Nageswari2, Kaliappan Ilango3. 1. Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, Sri Ramachandra University, Porur, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. 2. Department of Pulmonary Medicine, SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre, SRM University, Tamil Nadu, India. 3. Interdisciplinary School of Indian System of Medicine, SRM University, Tamil Nadu, India. Electronic address: ilangok67@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Data comparing various second-line treatments for asthma with subjective and objective assessment are lacking. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of montelukast, doxofylline, and tiotropium with a low-dose budesonide in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. METHODS: Patients, all of whom were concurrently using inhaled budesonide (400 µg), were treated for 6 months with formoterol (12 µg), montelukast (10 mg), doxofylline (400 mg), or tiotropium (18 µg). Outcomes included forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), Saint George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores, asthma symptom scores (daytime and nighttime), and assessment of tolerability and rescue medication use. FINDINGS: A total of 297 patients completed the study. In all 4 groups, significant improvements were observed in all the outcome measures, with formoterol treatment having greater and earlier improvements than the other 3 second-line controller medications with budesonide. Among the second-line treatments, monteradlukast improved the FEV1 from day 45 (P < 0.01), SGRQ scores from day 30 (P < 0.0001), daytime scores from day 30 (P < 0.05), nighttime scores from day 30 (P < 0.0001), and rescue medication use from day 15 (P < .0001) at a faster rate than doxofylline or tiotropium with budesonide. No patients discontinued the treatment because of adverse reactions. IMPLICATIONS: Among the tested second-line treatment regimens, the budesonide/montelukast combination was found to be superior to either the budesonide/doxofylline or budesonide/tiotropium combination in all the outcome measures without adversely affecting the tolerability of the patients. Further clinical studies with blinding techniques are likely to be useful.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Data comparing various second-line treatments for asthma with subjective and objective assessment are lacking. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of montelukast, doxofylline, and tiotropium with a low-dose budesonide in patients with mild to moderate persistent asthma. METHODS:Patients, all of whom were concurrently using inhaled budesonide (400 µg), were treated for 6 months with formoterol (12 µg), montelukast (10 mg), doxofylline (400 mg), or tiotropium (18 µg). Outcomes included forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), Saint George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) scores, asthma symptom scores (daytime and nighttime), and assessment of tolerability and rescue medication use. FINDINGS: A total of 297 patients completed the study. In all 4 groups, significant improvements were observed in all the outcome measures, with formoterol treatment having greater and earlier improvements than the other 3 second-line controller medications with budesonide. Among the second-line treatments, monteradlukast improved the FEV1 from day 45 (P < 0.01), SGRQ scores from day 30 (P < 0.0001), daytime scores from day 30 (P < 0.05), nighttime scores from day 30 (P < 0.0001), and rescue medication use from day 15 (P < .0001) at a faster rate than doxofylline or tiotropium with budesonide. No patients discontinued the treatment because of adverse reactions. IMPLICATIONS: Among the tested second-line treatment regimens, the budesonide/montelukast combination was found to be superior to either the budesonide/doxofylline or budesonide/tiotropium combination in all the outcome measures without adversely affecting the tolerability of the patients. Further clinical studies with blinding techniques 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