Empirical Performance of a New User Cohort Method: Lessons for Developing a Risk Identification and Analysis System

P. Ryan,M. Schuemie,Susan Gruber,Ivan Zorych,D. Madigan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-013-0099-6

2013-10-29

Drug Safety

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Overall asthma control: the relationship between current control and future risk

Eric D Bateman,Helen K Reddel,Göran Eriksson,Stefan Peterson,Ollie Ostlund,Malcolm R Sears,Christine Jenkins,Marc Humbert,Roland Buhl,Tim W Harrison,Santiago Quirce,Paul M O'Byrne

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2009.11.033

Abstract:Background: Asthma guidelines emphasize both maintaining current control and reducing future risk, but the relationship between these 2 targets is not well understood. Objective: This retrospective analysis of 5 budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy (Symbicort SMART Turbuhaler(*)) studies assessed the relationship between asthma control questionnaire (ACQ-5) and Global Initiative for Asthma-defined clinical asthma control and future risk of instability and exacerbations. Methods: The percentage of patients with Global Initiative for Asthma-defined controlled asthma over time was assessed for budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy versus the 3 maintenance therapies; higher dose inhaled corticosteroid (ICS), same dose ICS/long-acting beta(2)-agonist (LABA), and higher dose ICS/LABA plus short-acting beta(2)-agonist. The relationship between baseline ACQ-5 and exacerbations was investigated. A Markov analysis examined the transitional probability of change in control status throughout the studies. Results: The percentage of patients achieving asthma control increased with time, irrespective of treatment; the percentage Controlled/Partly Controlled at study end was at least similar to budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy versus the 3 maintenance therapies: higher dose ICS (56% vs 45%), same dose ICS/LABA (56% vs 53%), and higher dose ICS/LABA (54% vs 54%). Baseline ACQ-5 score correlated positively with exacerbation rates. A Controlled or Partly Controlled week predicted at least Partly Controlled asthma the following week (>or=80% probability). The better the control, the lower the risk of an Uncontrolled week. The probability of an exacerbation was related to current state and was lower with budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy. Conclusions: Current control predicts future risk of instability and exacerbations. Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy reduces exacerbations versus comparators and achieves at least similar control.
Budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and reliever therapy of asthma: a meta analysis of randomised controlled trials

S. J. Edwards,R. Von Maltzahn,I. P. Naya,T. Harrison,R. von Maltzahn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2009.02320.x

IF: 2.6

2010-04-01

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Abstract:OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol (Symbicort) for Maintenance and Reliever Therapy (Symbicort SMART) Turbuhaler with twice daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) treatment, alone or in combination with a long-acting beta(2)-agonist (LABA).METHODS: Meta analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using a fixed effects model. RCTs were included if the comparator with budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and relief had the equivalent, or up to fourfold higher, maintenance dose of ICS. The primary outcome was the incidence of severe exacerbation (oral glucocorticosteroid treatment for > or = 3 days, emergency visit and/or hospitalisation).RESULTS: Of the seven RCTs available six met the inclusion criteria. Risk of severe exacerbations was significantly reduced: 41% vs. higher-dose budesonide alone [relative risk (RR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.51-0.68, p < 0.00001]; 43% vs. equivalent dose budesonide/formoterol as maintenance twice daily (RR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.49-0.66, p < 0.00001); 24% vs. higher-dose salmeterol/fluticasone twice daily (RR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.64-0.90, p = 0.002); and 26% vs. higher-dose budesonide/formoterol twice daily (RR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.58-0.96, p = 0.02). Significant heterogeneity was not detected in the primary analyses (p > 0.1). Secondary analyses also demonstrated that budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and relief reduced the most severe exacerbations, resulting in less hospitalisations/accident and emergency visits than higher-dose budesonide, equivalent dose budesonide/formoterol and higher-dose salmeterol/fluticasone twice daily.CONCLUSION: Budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and relief is significantly more effective at reducing severe exacerbations than higher-dose ICS alone, or in combination with a LABA. This has important implications for treating uncontrolled patients at steps 2 and 3 of the joint BTS/SIGN guidelines.

medicine, general & internal
Positioning As-needed Budesonide–Formoterol for Mild Asthma: Effect of Prestudy Treatment in Pooled Analysis of SYGMA 1 and 2

Eric D. Bateman,Paul M. O’Byrne,J. Mark FitzGerald,Peter J. Barnes,Jinping Zheng,Rosa Lamarca,Margareta Puu,Himanshu Parikh,Vijay Alagappan,Helen K. Reddel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1513/AnnalsATS.202011-1386OC

2021-12-02

Abstract:Rationale: The SYGMA (Symbicort Given as Needed in Mild Asthma) studies evaluated the efficacy and safety of as-needed budesonide (BUD)–formoterol (FORM) in patients whose asthma was uncontrolled on as-needed inhaled short-acting bronchodilators (subgroup 1) or controlled on inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) or leukotriene receptor antagonists (subgroup 2). Objectives: To assess the influence of prestudy treatment in a post hoc analysis of the SYGMA studies. Methods: In the SYGMA 1 (NCT022149199) and SYGMA 2 (NCT02224157) 52-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group studies, 6,735 patients with mild asthma were randomized to as-needed BUD–FORM, low-dose BUD + as-needed terbutaline (BUD maintenance), or as-needed terbutaline (SYGMA 1 only). Exacerbation rates and changes in symptom control and lung function were compared among treatments for both subgroups. Results: In a pooled analysis of SYGMA 1 and 2, the annual severe exacerbation rate in subgroup 1 was significantly lower with as-needed BUD–FORM (0.08 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06–0.10]) than with BUD maintenance (0.10 [95% CI, 0.09–0.13]) (rate ratio [RR], 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56–0.98]; P = 0.03), and similar results were shown in subgroup 2 with BUD–FORM (0.12 [95% CI, 0.10–0.14]) and BUD maintenance (0.10 [95% CI, 0.09–0.13]) (RR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.86–1.41]; P = 0.44). In SYGMA 1, the annual severe exacerbation rate in both subgroups was significantly lower with as-needed BUD–FORM than with as-needed terbutaline (subgroup 1: RR, 0.34 [95% CI, 0.20–0.58]; P < 0.001; subgroup 2: RR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.25–0.54]; P < 0.001). The number needed to treat to prevent one severe exacerbation with as-needed BUD–FORM and BUD maintenance versus as-needed terbutaline were 20 and 34 in subgroup 1 and 13 and 12 in subgroup 2, respectively. Conclusions: These findings suggest that, for patients with mild asthma currently receiving short-acting β 2 -agonists alone, as-needed low-dose ICS–FORM should be preferred over maintenance ICS as initial controller treatment. For patients whose asthma is controlled on maintenance low-dose ICS, as-needed BUD–FORM is an alternative to maintenance ICS without the need for daily treatment, and both of these options are safer than switching to short-acting β 2 -agonist–only treatment.

respiratory system
Systematic review and meta-analysis of budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler

Steven J. Edwards,Kevin Gruffydd-Jones,Dermot P. Ryan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1185/030079907x210697

2007-06-26

Current Medical Research and Opinion

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of budesonide/formoterol using fixed dosing (BUD/FORM) with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) alone or alternative ICS and long-acting beta(2)-agonist (LABA) regimens for adults with moderate/severe asthma.METHODS: BIOSIS, CENTRAL, EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched for abstracts and papers. All searching was completed in July 2006. No restriction was placed on language. Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using a fixed effects model. RCTs were included if the comparator with BUD/FORM had an equivalent daily dose of ICS at the start of the trial. The primary outcome measure was, 'treatment failure', defined as: asthma-related serious adverse event, oral glucocorticosteroid treatment, A&E visit and/or admission to hospital, withdrawal due to a need for additional asthma therapy.RESULTS: Of the 330 papers identified in the literature search, 15 met the inclusion criteria. The following alternative treatments were found: ICS alone (BUD), BUD/FORM adjustable maintenance dose (BUD/FORM-AMD), and salmeterol/fluticasone in a single inhaler (SALM/FP). Meta-analysis of treatment failure demonstrated a 50% increase with BUD versus BUD/FORM (Relative Risk [RR] 1.50, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.12-2.02, p = 0.007; 2 RCTs); a trend in favour of a reduction with BUD/FORM-AMD versus BUD/FORM (RR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.77-1.02, p = 0.09; 11 RCTs); and no evidence of a difference with SALM/FP versus BUD/FORM (RR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.83-1.16, p = 0.86; 3 RCTs). Significant heterogeneity was not detected in the primary analyses. Secondary analyses demonstrated the following significant differences: hospitalisations/A&E visits (49% increased risk with SALM/FP vs. BUD/FORM, RR 1.49, 95% CI: 1.07-2.08, p = 0.02, and 28% reduced risk with BUD/FORM-AMD vs. BUD/FORM, RR 0.72, 95% CI: 0.52-0.99, p = 0.04); and use of oral steroids (51% increase in risk with BUD vs. BUD/FORM, RR 1.51, 95% CI: 1.10-2.09, p = 0.01, and 19% reduced risk with BUD/FORM-AMD vs. BUD/FORM, RR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.70-0.95, p = 0.01).CONCLUSIONS: Fixed-dose BUD/FORM is an effective treatment option for adult patients with moderate/severe asthma when compared to BUD and SALM/FP, with adjustable maintenance dosing demonstrating important advantages over fixed dosing in relation to exacerbation prevention and reduced treatment load.

medicine, general & internal, research & experimental
A Multicenter, Cross-Sectional, Observational Study of Budesonide/Formoterol Maintenance and Reliever Therapy in Real-World Settings

Jiangtao Lin,Jing Li,Wencheng Yu,Yuejian Liu,Chuntao Liu,Ping Chen,Huijie He,Bei He,Shuang Liu,Xiangdong Zhou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2017.04.004

IF: 4.3

2017-01-01

Respiratory Medicine

Abstract:Background: To assess the level of asthma control achieved with budesonide/formoterol in Chinese patients with asthma, based on the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) definition and Asthma Control Test (ACT) score.Methods: This multicenter, cross-sectional study (NCT01785901) evaluated asthma control levels in Chinese patients receiving physician -prescribed budesonide/formoterol treatment. Adults with a diagnosis of asthma >6 months and receiving budesonide/formoterol treatment >3 months before screening were consecutively enrolled. Data including medical and medication history were collected using faceto-face questionnaires and physical examinations during a single visit.Results: A total of 1483 asthma out-patients from 27 medical centers were enrolled; 217 (14.6%) were treated with budesonide/formoterol using a fixed-dose strategy-and 1266 (85.4%) with the SMART (Symbicort Maintenance And Reliever Therapy) strategy. According to GINA criteria, asthma was controlled in 58.6% (95% CI: 56.1%-61.1%) of patients and was either controlled or partly controlled in 94.1% (95% CI: 92.8%-95.3%) of patients. According to ACT score, asthma was completely controlled in 22.4% (95% CI: 20.3%-24.6%) of patients and was either completely or well controlled in 83.3% (95% CI: 81.4%-85.2%) of patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that a >-5-Year history of asthma and an age of >50 years were factors associated with lower levels of asthma control.Conclusions: This study demonstrated high levels of asthma control (GINA: controlled and partly controlled and ACT: completely and well controlled) in Chinese patients with asthma treated with 'budesonideiformoterol. Greater age and a longer disease history were associated with lower levels of asthma control. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Budesonide/formoterol or budesonide/albuterol as anti-inflammatory reliever therapy for asthma

Brian Lipworth,Chris RuiWen Kuo,Kirsten Stewart,Rory Chan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2024.02.003

IF: 11.022

2024-02-13

The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology In Practice

Abstract:Over use of reliever as short acting beta-agonist (SABA) and associated underuse of controller as inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) administered via separate inhalers results in worse asthma outcomes . Such discordance can be obviated by combining both controller and reliever in the same inhaler. So called anti-inflammatory reliever (AIR) therapy comprises the use of a single inhaler containing an ICS such as budesonide (BUD) in conjunction with a reliever as either albuterol (ALB) or formoterol (FORM) ,to be used on demand with variable dosing driven by asthma symptoms in a flexible patient centred regimen. Global guidelines now support the use of BUD-ALB as AIR therapy to reduce exacerbations , either on its own in mild asthma or in conjunction with fixed dose maintenance ICS-long acting beta-agonist (LABA) in moderate to severe asthma . Using BUD-FORM on its own allows patients to seamlessly move in an intuitive flexible fashion between AIR or maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) , by stepping up and down the dosing escalator across a spectrum of asthma severities . Head to head clinical studies are indicated to compare BUD-FORM versus BUD-ALB as AIR in mild asthma ,and also BUD-FORM as MART versus BUD-ALB as AIR plus maintenance ICS-LABA in moderate to severe asthma. Patients should be encouraged to make an informed decision in conjunction with their health care professional regarding the best therapeutic option tailored to their individual needs , which in turn is likely to result in long term compliance and associated optimal asthma control.

immunology,allergy
Budesonide/formoterol: a review of its use in asthma

David R Goldsmith,Gillian M Keating

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003495-200464140-00006

Drugs

Abstract:Budesonide and formoterol have been combined in a single dry powder device, Symbicort Turbuhaler (budesonide/formoterol 160/9-640/18 microg/day), in an effort to simplify asthma management. The efficacy of budesonide/formoterol as maintenance therapy in patients with asthma has been examined in several randomised studies.Twice-daily budesonide/formoterol was significantly more effective than an equivalent or higher daily dose of budesonide alone or high-dose fluticasone propionate alone at improving peak expiratory flow (PEF) in adults with predominantly moderate persistent asthma. Symptom control and the risk of mild exacerbations were significantly improved versus budesonide alone. Moreover, budesonide/formoterol appeared to be as effective as concurrent therapy with equivalent dosages of budesonide and formoterol administered via separate inhalers in adults with moderate persistent asthma. Budesonide/formoterol administered once daily was as effective as twice-daily administration (equivalent daily doses) and more effective than once-daily budesonide in adults with moderate persistent asthma. Twice-daily budesonide/formoterol significantly improved PEF compared with budesonide in paediatric patients with asthma. Adjustable maintenance dosing with budesonide/formoterol was associated with significantly less study drug use than fixed dosing with budesonide/formoterol in adults with predominantly mild or moderate persistent asthma. In two of three studies (all longer than 4 months' duration), the risk of exacerbations was significantly lower with adjustable than with fixed dosing, but no difference was detected in four short-term studies. Symptom severity was maintained or improved in most patients receiving either treatment regimen. In adults with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma, adjustable maintenance dosing with budesonide/formoterol reduced the rate of exacerbations and reliever medication use compared with fixed dosing with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate. Budesonide/formoterol was well tolerated in both fixed and adjustable dosing regimens. In conclusion, in patients with persistent asthma symptoms despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids, budesonide/formoterol administered via a single dry powder Turbuhaler device is an effective, well tolerated, convenient treatment option, which may have the potential for improved compliance. It appears to be as effective as treatment with budesonide and formoterol administered via separate inhalers and is more effective than budesonide monotherapy in improving PEF, controlling symptoms and preventing mild exacerbations. Adjustable maintenance dosing with budesonide/formoterol is associated with a lower overall dosage and appears to maintain control as effectively as fixed dosing.
Comparison of early effects of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol for asthma patients requiring step-up from inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy

Soichiro Hozawa,Michikazu Terada,Yoshinori Haruta,Maki Hozawa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pupt.2016.01.005

Abstract:Background: If asthma patients fail to achieve symptom control using a medium dose of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) alone, addition of a long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) is the preferred treatment. Currently, there are several combinations of ICS/LABA that are available, each of which has a different property. Here, we aimed to compare the early effects of budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FM; Symbicort(®)) for maintenance and reliever therapy (SMART) with a fixed dose of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI; Relvar(®)). Methods: Inadequately controlled asthma patients (defined as having an Asthma Control Questionnaire, 5-item version [ACQ5] score≥1.5) with a fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) value > 35 ppb, who had been treated with a medium dose of ICS alone, were enrolled. Patients were randomized into two groups and treated with two inhalations twice-daily of BUD/FM 160/4.5 μg plus as-needed BUD/FM (SMART group, n = 15) or one inhalation once-daily of FF/VI 100/25 μg plus as-needed procaterol (FF/VI group, n = 15) for 4 weeks. Outcomes including FeNO, impulse oscillometry (IOS) parameters and ACQ5 scores were measured at 0, 2 and 4 weeks. Results: Both groups showed improvement in airway inflammation, pulmonary function and symptoms from baseline to 2 weeks. From 2 to 4 weeks, the SMART group exhibited continuous improvement in most measured parameters, whereas improvement in the FF/VI group seemed to reach a plateau transiently. Consequently, the SMART group showed significant improvement in the FeNO, IOS parameters (resonance frequency and integrated area of low frequency reactance) and ACQ5 score as compared with the FF/VI group at 4 weeks. Conclusion: As compared with the FF/VI group, the SMART group achieved a greater improvement in FeNO, small airway parameters regarding IOS and ACQ score, in patients with airway inflammation and uncontrolled symptoms treated with a medium dose of ICS alone. In this 4-week study, these two ICS/LABA combination therapies showed different treatment outcomes; they must be investigated further to clarify suitable patient characters and the long term efficacies for each combination.
Budesonide/Formoterol Maintenance and Reliever Therapy in Chinese Patients with Asthma

Lin Jiang-tao,Chen Ping,Zhou Xin,Sun Tie-ying,Xie Can-mao,Xiu Qing-yu,Yao Wan-zhen,Yang Lan,Yin Kai-sheng,Zhang Yong-ming

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.2012.17.006

IF: 6.133

2012-01-01

Chinese Medical Journal

Abstract:Background Many studies have shown the superior efficacy of budesonide (BUD)/formoterol (FORM) maintenance and reliever therapy, but still lack evidence of its efficacy in Chinese asthma patients in a relative large patient-group. We finished this research to compare BUD/FORM maintenance and reliever therapy and high-dose salmeterol (SALM)/fluticasone (FP) maintenance plus an as-needed short-acting beta(2)-agonist in Chinese patients with persistent uncontrolled asthma. This was a post hoc analysis based on a 6-month, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study (NCT00242775).Methods A total of 222 eligible asthma patients from nine centers in China were randomized to either BUD/FORM+as-needed BUD/FORM (160/4.5 mu g/inhalation) (640/18 mu g/d; n=111), or SALM/FP+as-needed terbutaline (0.4 mg/inhalation) (100/1000 mu g/d; n=111). The primary endpoint was time to first severe exacerbation while secondary endpoints included various measures of pulmonary function, symptom control and quality-of-life.Results Time to first severe exacerbation over six months was lower with the BUD/FORM than with the SALM/FP treatment (risk ratio=0.52, 95% CI 0.22-1.22), but the difference did not achieve statistical significance (P=0.13). The cumulative number of severe exacerbations in the BUD/FORM group was lower than in the SALM/FP group (7.2% vs. 13.5%; risk ratio=0.45, P=0.028). BUD/FORM produced significantly better improvements in reliever use, cumulative mild exacerbations, symptom-free days (%), and morning/evening peak expiratory flow (PEF) than SALM/FP (P <0.05 in all cases). The two groups achieved similar improvements in their time to first mild exacerbation, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), asthma control questionnaire and asthma symptom scores, and percentage of nights with awakening(s). Both treatments were well tolerated.Conclusions In Chinese patients with persistent asthma, BUD/FORM decreased severe and mild exacerbations, decreased reliever use, increased symptom-free days, and improved morning/evening PEF compared with SALM/FP. There were no significant differences in time to first severe exacerbation or other assessments regarding daily asthma control between BUD/FORM and SALM/FP. BUD/FORM was more effective in this Chinese sub-group than in the total cohort involved in the original study. (Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT00242775) Chin Med J 2012;125(17):2994-3001
Treatment of persistent asthma with Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol inhalation aerosol): an inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist in one pressurized metered-dose inhaler

William E Berger,Michael J Noonan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/02770901003725684

Abstract:Objective: Budesonide/formoterol inhalation aerosol (Symbicort AstraZeneca, Wilmington, Delaware) is an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonist (LABA) combination administered twice daily via one hydrofluoroalkane pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) approved in the United States for the long-term maintenance treatment of persistent asthma in patients >or=12 years of age whose asthma cannot be controlled by an ICS alone. The objective was to review efficacy, safety, and pharmacogenetic data on budesonide/formoterol pMDI in the treatment of persistent asthma. Methods: The authors searched PubMed and respiratory meeting databases to identify asthma studies of budesonide/formoterol pMDI. Studies involving traditional and patient-reported outcomes, safety, tolerability, or pharmacogenetics were included. Results: In two 12-week pivotal trials in adolescents and adults, treatment with budesonide/formoterol pMDI 160/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (320/9 microg) twice daily for moderate to severe persistent asthma or 80/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations (160/9 microg) twice daily for mild to moderate persistent asthma, demonstrated greater efficacy and similar tolerability compared with placebo and the same nominal dose of its monocomponents. Comparisons with formoterol dry powder inhaler (DPI) for predose forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) and with budesonide pMDI for 12-hour mean postdose FEV(1) demonstrated the anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory contributions of budesonide and formoterol, respectively. Evaluations of patient-reported outcomes, including asthma-specific quality of life and treatment satisfaction, further supported the clinical benefits of budesonide/formoterol pMDI. In a 52-week tolerability study of patients aged >or=12 years, budesonide/formoterol pMDI was delivered at up to double the maximum dose (640/18 microg twice daily) and demonstrated a safety profile similar to that of budesonide (640 microg twice daily), with no unexpected pattern of abnormalities. Additional studies reported that budesonide/formoterol pMDI 320/9 microg twice daily and fluticasone propionate/salmeterol DPI 250/50 microg twice daily have similar efficacy and tolerability, with significantly more patients achieving >or=15% improvement in FEV(1) within 15 minutes with budesonide/formoterol pMDI compared with fluticasone/salmeterol DPI. Moreover, inheritance of the Gly16Arg polymorphism of the beta(2)-adrenergic receptor does not appear to affect clinical outcomes with budesonide/formoterol pMDI. Conclusion: Budesonide/formoterol pMDI administered twice daily is effective and generally well tolerated in patients whose asthma is not well controlled on ICS alone.
Effect of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy on asthma exacerbations

P. Kuna,M. J. Peters,A. I. Manjra,C. Jorup,I. P. Naya,N. E. Martínez‐Jimenez,R. Buhl,N. E. Martínez-Jimenez

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2007.01338.x

IF: 2.6

2007-03-16

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Abstract:This randomised, double-blind, 6-month study compared budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and relief with salmeterol/fluticasone and a fixed maintenance dose of budesonide/formoterol, both with terbutaline for relief. Following a 2-week run-in, 3335 symptomatic adults and adolescents (mean FEV1 73% predicted, mean inhaled corticosteroid dose 745 microg/day) received budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 microg one inhalation bid plus additional inhalations as needed, salmeterol/fluticasone 25/125 microg two inhalations bid plus as-needed terbutaline or budesonide/formoterol 320/9 microg one inhalation bid plus as-needed terbutaline. Budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and relief prolonged the time to first severe exacerbation requiring hospitalisation, emergency room treatment or oral steroids (primary variable) vs. fixed-dose salmeterol/fluticasone and budesonide/formoterol (p=0.0034 and p=0.023 respectively; log-rank test). Exacerbation rates were 19, 16 and 12 events/100 patients/6 months for salmeterol/fluticasone, fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol and budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and relief, respectively, [rate reduction vs. fixed-dose salmeterol/fluticasone (0.61; 95% CI 0.49-0.76, p<0.001) and vs. fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol (0.72; 95% CI 0.57-0.90, p=0.0048)]. Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and relief patients used less inhaled corticosteroid vs. salmeterol/fluticasone and fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol patients. All treatments provided similar marked improvements in lung function, asthma control days and asthma-related quality of life. Budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and relief reduces asthma exacerbations and maintains similar daily asthma control at a lower overall drug load compared with fixed-dose salmeterol/fluticasone and budesonide/formoterol.

medicine, general & internal
Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy in adolescent patients with asthma

Carin Jorup,Dan Lythgoe,Hans Bisgaard

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01688-2017

2018-01-04

Abstract:Asthma control is often suboptimal in adolescents, but few studies have evaluated asthma treatments in this population.This post hoc analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) maintenance and reliever therapy (MART) for treatment of persistent asthma in adolescent (age 12-17 years) subgroups within six randomised, double-blind trials. The primary end-point was time to first severe exacerbation. Secondary end-points included number of severe exacerbations, asthma-related symptoms, night-time awakenings, morning peak expiratory flow, forced expiratory volume in 1 s, as-needed medication use and five-item asthma control questionnaire scores.In adolescents (n=1847), BUD/FORM MART was similar to or more effective than comparators across each of the studies in reducing the risk of a first severe exacerbation (hazard ratios (HR) BUD/FORM MART versus comparators 0.15-1.01; pooled HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.70), with comparable outcomes to the adult subgroups (n=12 197). Similar treatment benefits for BUD/FORM MART were observed for secondary end-points. As-needed medication use was lower with BUD/FORM MART than comparators, and BUD/FORM as-needed use was lower in adolescents than adults. Treatment was well tolerated.This analysis supports the use of BUD/FORM MART in adolescents with persistent asthma, its efficacy and safety being consistent with that reported for adults.
Efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol single inhaler therapy versus a higher dose of budesonide in moderate to severe asthma

R. Scicchitano,R. Aalbers,D. Ukena,A. Manjra,L. Fouquert,S. Centanni,L.-P. Boulet,I. P. Naya,C. Hultquist

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1185/030079904x2051

2004-07-22

Current Medical Research and Opinion

Abstract:OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a novel asthma management strategy--budesonide/formoterol for both maintenance and symptom relief (Symbicort Single Inhaler Therapy)--compared with a higher maintenance dose of budesonide in patients with moderate to severe asthma.METHODS: This was a 12-month, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study. Symptomatic patients with asthma (n = 1890; mean age 43 years [range 11 years-80 years], mean baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV(1)] 70% of predicted, mean inhaled corticosteroid [ICS] dose 746 microg/day) received either budesonide (160 microg, 2 inhalations twice daily) plus terbutaline 0.4 mg as needed or a daily maintenance dose of budesonide/formoterol (160/4.5 microg, 2 inhalations once daily) with additional inhalations of budesonide/formoterol 160/4.5 microg as needed. Time to first severe exacerbation (hospitalisation/emergency room [ER] treatment or systemic steroids due to asthma worsening or a fall in morning peak expiratory flow [PEF] to < or = 70% of baseline on 2 consecutive days) was the primary outcome variable.RESULTS: A total of 1890 patients were randomised, of whom 1563 (83%) had severe asthma. The time to first severe exacerbation was prolonged by budesonide/formoterol single inhaler therapy (p < 0.001) compared with a higher dose of budesonide. The risk of having a severe exacerbation was 39% lower with budesonide/formoterol single inhaler therapy compared with budesonide (p < 0.001). The number needed to treat to prevent one severe exacerbation per year with budesonide/formoterol compared with budesonide was 5. The budesonide/formoterol group had 45% fewer severe exacerbations requiring medical intervention per patient compared with the budesonide group (p < 0.001). Budesonide/formoterol patients had fewer hospitalisations/ER treatments (15 vs 25 events, respectively [descriptive statistics]) and fewer treatment days with systemic steroids (1776 days vs 3177 days, respectively [descriptive statistics]) compared with budesonide patients. Budesonide/formoterol single inhaler therapy patients used less as-needed medication compared with budesonide patients (0.90 vs 1.42 inhalations/day; p < 0.001). The mean daily ICS dose was lower in the budesonide/formoterol group than in the budesonide group (466 microg/day vs 640 microg/day). Over the 12-month study period, the budesonide/formoterol group achieved asthma control sufficient to not require any additional as-needed medication on 60% of days. Overall, budesonide/formoterol single inhaler therapy gave 31 more asthma control days (a night and day with no asthma symptoms and no as-needed medication use) per patient-year and 12 additional undisturbed nights per patient-year compared with a higher dose of budesonide. Both treatments were well tolerated.CONCLUSION: Budesonide/formoterol single inhaler therapy has the potential to provide a complete asthma management approach with one inhaler, demonstrating a high level of efficacy in patients with moderate to severe asthma.

medicine, general & internal, research & experimental
Budesonide-formoterol reliever therapy versus maintenance budesonide plus terbutaline reliever therapy in adults with mild to moderate asthma (PRACTICAL): a 52-week, open-label, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial

Jo Hardy,Christina Baggott,James Fingleton,Helen K Reddel,Robert J Hancox,Matire Harwood,Andrew Corin,Jenny Sparks,Daniela Hall,Doñah Sabbagh,Saras Mane,Alexandra Vohlidkova,John Martindale,Mathew Williams,Philippa Shirtcliffe,Mark Holliday,Mark Weatherall,Richard Beasley,PRACTICAL study team,Andrew Corin,Liz Dronfield,Colin Helm,Tracy Paterson,Bhuwan Poudel,Malcolm Dyer,Christine Jasinski,Davitt Sheahan,Pamela Sheahan,Nick Gailer,Jan Van Zuilen,Andy Basa,Christine Devereaux,Karin Egan,Sneha Haughey,Rodney Marks,Dirk Venter,Hank Zhang,Karen Trevithick,Mike Williams,Philippa Williams,Christina Baggott,Richard Beasley,Irene Braithwaite,Alexandra Eathorne,Stefan Ebmeier,James Fingleton,Daniela Hall,Jo Hardy,Matire Harwood,Mark Holliday,Claire Houghton,Saras Mane,John Martindale,Karen Oldfield,Janine Pilcher,Doñah Sabbagh,Philippa Shirtcliffe,Suzanne Snively,Jenny Sparks,Alexandra Vohlidkova,Mathew Williams,Patrick Collins,Summer Hassan,Annika Lam,Claudette Lionnet,Barney Montgomery,Liz Smaill,Stella Moon,Dean Quinn,Elena Bayly-McCredie,Chris Millar-Coote,Dean Millar-Coote,Jim Reid,Anna Samuel,Nicola Burton,Tina Mullard,Tyronne Tranquilino,Edward Watson,Jill Bell,Rachel Harris,John Richmond,Sue Smith,Brent Krivan,Cheryl Robertson,Robert J Hancox,Mark Weatherall,Sue Glensor,Dermot O'Connor,Anne-Christine Porrachia,Helen K Reddel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)31948-8

IF: 202.731

2019-09-01

The Lancet

Abstract:<h2 class="section-title u-h3 u-margin-l-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Summary</h2><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Background</h3><p>In adults with mild asthma, a combination of an inhaled corticosteroid with a fast-onset long-acting β-agonist (LABA) used as reliever monotherapy reduces severe exacerbations compared with short-acting β-agonist (SABA) reliever therapy. We investigated the efficacy of combination budesonide–formoterol reliever therapy compared with maintenance budesonide plus as-needed terbutaline.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Methods</h3><p>We did a 52-week, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial at 15 primary care or hospital-based clinical trials units and primary care practices in New Zealand. Participants were adults aged 18–75 years with a self-reported doctor's diagnosis of asthma who were using SABA for symptom relief with or without maintenance low to moderate doses of inhaled corticosteroids in the previous 12 weeks. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) to either reliever therapy with budesonide 200 μg–formoterol 6 μg Turbuhaler (one inhalation as needed for relief of symptoms) or maintenance budesonide 200 μg Turbuhaler (one inhalation twice daily) plus terbutaline 250 μg Turbuhaler (two inhalations as needed). Participants and investigators were not masked to group assignment; the statistician was masked for analysis of the primary outcome. Six study visits were scheduled: randomisation, and weeks 4, 16, 28, 40, and 52. The primary outcome was the number of severe exacerbations per patient per year analysed by intention to treat (severe exacerbations defined as use of systemic corticosteroids for at least 3 days because of asthma, or admission to hospital or an emergency department visit because of asthma requiring systemic corticosteroids). Safety analyses included all participants who had received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12616000377437.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Findings</h3><p>Between May 4, 2016, and Dec 22, 2017, we assigned 890 participants to treatment and included 885 eligible participants in the analysis: 437 assigned to budesonide–formoterol as needed and 448 to budesonide maintenance plus terbutaline as needed. Severe exacerbations per patient per year were lower with as-needed budesonide–formoterol than with maintenance budesonide plus terbutaline as needed (absolute rate per patient per year 0·119 <em>vs</em> 0·172; relative rate 0·69, 95% CI 0·48–1·00; p=0·049). Nasopharyngitis was the most common adverse event in both groups, occurring in 154 (35%) of 440 patients receiving as-needed budesonide–formoterol and 144 (32%) of 448 receiving maintenance budesonide plus terbutaline as needed.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Interpretation</h3><p>In adults with mild to moderate asthma, budesonide–formoterol used as needed for symptom relief was more effective at preventing severe exacerbations than maintenance low-dose budesonide plus as-needed terbutaline. The findings support the 2019 Global Initiative for Asthma recommendation that inhaled corticosteroid–formoterol reliever therapy is an alternative regimen to daily low-dose inhaled corticosteroid for patients with mild asthma.</p><h3 class="u-h4 u-margin-m-top u-margin-xs-bottom">Funding</h3><p>Health Research Council of New Zealand.</p>

medicine, general & internal
Effect of budesonide in combination with formoterol for reliever therapy in asthma exacerbations: a randomised controlled, double-blind study

Klaus F Rabe,Tito Atienza,Pál Magyar,Per Larsson,Carin Jorup,Umesh G Lalloo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(06)69284-2

IF: 202.731

2006-08-01

The Lancet

Abstract:BACKGROUND: The contributions of as-needed inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta2 agonists (LABA) to asthma control have not been fully established. We compared the efficacy and safety of three reliever strategies: a traditional short-acting beta2 agonist; a rapid-onset LABA (formoterol); and a combination of LABA and an inhaled corticosteroid (budesonide-formoterol) in symptomatic patients receiving budesonide-formoterol maintenance therapy.METHODS: We did a 12-month, double-blind, parallel-group study in 3394 patients (aged 12 years or older), in 289 centres in 20 countries, who were using inhaled corticosteroids at study entry and symptomatic on budesonide-formoterol (160 microg and 4.5 microg, respectively), one inhalation twice daily, during a 2-week run-in. After run-in, patients were randomly assigned budesonide-formoterol maintenance therapy plus one of three alternative as-needed medications-terbutaline (0.4 mg), formoterol (4.5 microg), or budesonide-formoterol (160 microg and 4.5 microg). The primary outcome was time to first severe exacerbation, defined as an event resulting in hospitalisation, emergency room treatment, or both, or the need for oral steroids for 3 days or more.FINDINGS: Time to first severe exacerbation was longer with as-needed budesonide-formoterol versus formoterol (p=0.0048; log-rank test) and with as-needed formoterol versus terbutaline (p=0.0051). The rate of severe exacerbations was 37, 29, and 19 per 100 patients per year with as-needed terbutaline, formoterol, and budesonide-formoterol, respectively (rate ratios budesonide-formoterol versus formoterol 0.67 [95% CI 0.56-0.80; p<0.0001]; budesonide-formoterol versus terbutaline 0.52 [0.44-0.62; p<0.0001]; formoterol versus terbutaline 0.78 [0.67-0.91; p=0.0012]). Asthma control days increased to a similar extent in all treatment groups. As-needed formoterol did not significantly improve symptoms compared with as-needed terbutaline. All treatments were well tolerated.INTERPRETATION: Both monocomponents of budesonide-formoterol given as needed contribute to enhanced protection from severe exacerbations in patients receiving combination therapy for maintenance.

medicine, general & internal
Step-in step-down approach in the management of bronchial asthma in adolescents and adults

Prahalad Rai Gupta,Ravindra Sarnaik,Neeraj Gupta,PrahaladRai Gupta

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/lungindia.lungindia_591_21

2022-01-01

Lung India

Abstract:Introduction: Despite the step-up step-down approach of asthma management suggested by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA), control of asthma continues to be poor. It was hypothesized that a new "Step-in Step-down approach" could prove to be a better alternative. The present study was carried out with the objective to assess the efficacy and adverse effects of this new approach in the control of asthma.Materials and Methods: All treatment-naïve asthma patients were randomly allocated to either Group I (patients received budesonide 400 μg + formoterol 6 μg twice daily via dry powder inhalation device along with as-needed salbutamol) or Group II (patients received stepwise treatment as per GINA guidelines, 2017). Patients were monitored on a fortnightly basis for control of symptoms, spirometry, and complications if any. Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ-7) was used to assess control of asthma. Adverse effects, if any, were recorded and managed appropriately. Step-down was attempted on achieving sustained control of asthma, i.e., ACQ score of <0.75 on two consecutive fortnight assessments in both the groups. In Group I patients, long-acting β2-agonist was withdrawn first. Subsequently, a dose of budesonide was also reduced. In Group II patients, the treatment was decreased to the next lower step medicines as per the GINA guidelines.Results: After exclusions, a total of 787 patients were randomized to either Group I or II. The demographic profile of patients in the two groups was similar. Patients on "step-in step-down" approach had a statistically significant advantage over those on conventional step-up step-down approach in terms of (a) time to the first control (271 vs. 98 within first 4 weeks), (b) need for rescue steroids (two patients in Group 1 vs. 40 in Group 2), (c) number of exacerbations (30 vs. 232), and (d) use of rescue SABA (Only 30 patients in group I required > 5 inhalations per week as compared to all in group II). Adverse reactions were not observed in any of the patients in either group.Conclusion: We conclude that step-in step-down approach is a more robust and safer approach for control of asthma.
Budesonide and Formoterol in a Single Inhaler Improves Asthma Control Compared With Increasing the Dose of Corticosteroid in Adults With Mild-to-Moderate Asthma

Umesh G. Lalloo,Jóseph Malolepszy,Dezsó Kozma,Kamil Krofta,Jaro Ankerst,Bjørn Johansen,Neil C. Thomson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.123.5.1480

IF: 9.6

2003-05-01

Chest

Abstract:BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of low-dose budesonide/formoterol, 80 micro g/4.5 micro g, bid in a single inhaler (Symbicort Turbuhaler; AstraZeneca; Lund, Sweden) compared with an increased dose of budesonide, 200 micro g bid, in adult patients with mild-to-moderate asthma not fully controlled on low doses of inhaled corticosteroid alone.METHODS: All patients received budesonide, 100 micro g bid, during a 2-week run-in period. At the end of the run-in phase, 467 patients with a mean FEV(1) of 82% predicted received 12 weeks of treatment with budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler or budesonide alone in a higher dose. Patients kept daily records of their morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), nighttime and daytime symptom scores, and use of reliever medication.RESULTS: The increase in mean morning PEF-the primary efficacy measure-was significantly higher for budesonide/formoterol compared with budesonide alone (16.5 L/min vs 7.3 L/min, p = 0.002). Similarly, evening PEF was significantly greater in the budesonide/formoterol group (p < 0.001). In addition, the percentage of symptom-free days and asthma-control days (p = 0.007 and p = 0.002, respectively) were significantly improved in the budesonide/formoterol group. Budesonide/formoterol decreased the relative risk of an asthma exacerbation by 26% (p = 0.02) compared with budesonide alone. Adverse events were comparable between the two treatment groups.CONCLUSION: This study shows that in adult patients whose mild-to-moderate asthma is not fully controlled on low doses of inhaled corticosteroids, single-inhaler therapy with budesonide and formoterol provides greater improvements in asthma control than increasing the maintenance dose of inhaled corticosteroid.

respiratory system,critical care medicine
Combination formoterol and budesonide as maintenance and reliever therapy versus combination inhaler maintenance for chronic asthma in adults and children

Kayleigh M Kew,Charlotta Karner,Stephanie M Mindus,Giovanni Ferrara

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd009019.pub2

IF: 8.4

2013-12-16

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Asthma is characterised by chronic inflammation of the airways and recurrent exacerbations with wheezing, chest tightness and cough. Treatment with inhaled steroids and bronchodilators often results in good control of symptoms, prevention of further morbidity and mortality and improved quality of life. Several steroids and beta2-agonists (long- and short-acting) as well as combinations of these treatments are available in a single inhaler to be used once or twice a day, with a separate inhaler for relief of symptoms when needed (for patients in Step three or higher, according to Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines). Budesonide/formoterol is also licenced for use as maintenance and reliever therapy from a single inhaler (SiT; sometimes referred to as SMART therapy). SiT can be prescribed at a lower dose than other combination therapy because of the additional steroid doses being received as reliever therapy. It has been suggested that using SiT improves compliance and hence reduces symptoms and exacerbations, but it is unclear whether it increases side effects associated with the use of inhaled steroids.OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler (SiT) to be used for both maintenance and reliever therapy in asthma in comparison with maintenance treatment provided through combination inhalers with a higher maintenance steroid dose (either fluticasone/salmeterol or budesonide/formoterol), along with additional fast-acting beta2-agonists for relief of symptoms.SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, online trial registries and drug company websites. The most recent search was conducted in November 2013.SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group, randomised controlled trials of at least 12 weeks' duration. Studies were included if they compared single-inhaler therapy with budesonide/formoterol (SiT) versus combination inhalers at a higher maintenance dose of steroids than was given in the SiT arm (either salmeterol/fluticasone or budesonide/formoterol).DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring hospitalisation, exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids and serious adverse events (including mortality).MAIN RESULTS: Four studies randomly assigning 9130 people with asthma were included; two were six-month double-blind studies, and two were 12-month open-label studies. No trials included children younger than age 12. Trials included more women than men, with mean age ranging from 38 to 45, and mean baseline steroid dose (inhaled beclomethasone (BDP) equivalent) from 636 to 888 μg. Mean baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) percentage predicted was between 70% and 73% in three of the trials, and 96% in another. All studies were funded by AstraZeneca and were generally free from methodological biases, although the two open-label studies were rated as having high risk for blinding, and some evidence of selective outcome reporting was found. These possible sources of bias did not lead us to downgrade the quality of the evidence. The quantity of inhaled steroids, including puffs taken for relief from symptoms, was consistently lower for SiT than for the comparison groups.Separate data for exacerbations leading to hospitalisations, to emergency room (ER) visits or to a course of oral steroids could not be obtained. Compared with higher fixed-dose combination inhalers, fewer people using SiT had exacerbations requiring hospitalisation or a visit to the ER (odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.90; I(2) = 0%, P = 0.66), and fewer had exacerbations requiring a course of oral corticosteroids (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87; I(2) = 0%, P = 0.82). This translates to one less person admitted to hospital or visiting the ER (95% CI 0 to 2 fewer) and two fewer people needing oral steroids (95% CI 1 to 3 fewer) compared with fixed-dose combination treatment with a short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) reliever (per 100 treated over eight months). No statistical heterogeneity was observed in either outcome, and the evidence was rated of high quality. Although issues with blinding were evident in two of the studies, and one study recruited a less severe population, sensitivity analyses did not change the main results, so quality was not downgraded.We could not rule out the possibility that SiT increased rates of serious adverse events (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13; I(2) = 0%, P = 0.98; moderate-quality evidence, downgraded owing to imprecision).We were unable to say whether SiT improved results for several secondary outcomes (morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), rescue medication use, symptoms scales), and in cases where results were significant, the effect sizes were not considered clinically meaningful (predose FEV1, nocturnal awakenings and quality of life).AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SiT reduces the number of people having asthma exacerbations requiring oral steroids and the number requiring hospitalisation or an ER visit compared with fixed-dose combination inhalers. Evidence for serious adverse events was unclear. The mean daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in SiT, including the total dose administered with reliever use, was always lower than that of the other combination groups. This suggests that the flexibility in steroid administration that is possible with SiT might be more effective than a standard fixed-dose combination by increasing the dose only when needed and keeping it low during stable stages of the disease. Data for hospitalisations alone could not be obtained, and no studies have yet addressed this question in children younger than age 12.

medicine, general & internal
Structure and phase transformation of ferromagnetic shape memory alloy Ni/sub 49/Mn/sub 30/Ga/sub 21/ fine particles prepared by spark erosion

Y. Tang,D.J. Smith,F. Spada,H. Harper,A. Berkowitz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TMAG.2003.816165

2003-09-23

Abstract:In this paper explained about the structure and martensitic transformation of Ni-Mn-Ga alloys. Temperature dependence of the magnetization curves are obtained. XRD was studied for sparked powder and annealed powder. SEM results are also discussed.
A Three-Month Non-Interventional Study of Asthma Treatment with Budesonide/Formoterol

ZHOU Xin,HONG Jian-guo,XIN Jian-bao,WU Chang-gui,BO Jian-ping,ZHANG Tian-tuo,WANG Chang-zheng,CAI Shao-xi,LIU Chun,QIU Chen,HUANG Jian-an,LAI Guo-xiang,KONG Ling-fei,LIU Chun-tao,MA Zhuang,HUANG Ke-wu,YANG He-ping,ZHOU Jian-ying,SUN Pei-zong,WANG Li-bo,TANG Su-ping,CHEN Zhi-min,LI Chang-chong,ZHAO De-yu,LIN Rong-jun,ZHENG Yue-jie,XIANG Li,ZHOU Xiao-qin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-6205.2009.04.007

2009-01-01

Abstract:Objective To evaluate the efficacy of Budesonide/formoterol to control asthma under real-life conditions.Methods A multi-center,open label,non-interventional study was conducted.Asthma control after 12 week therapy with Budesonide/formoterol was assessed by Asthma Control Questionnaire(ACQ) and modified Asthma Control Questionnaire(ACQ5).Results A total of 360 asthma patients were recruited,including 228 adult patients and 132 child patients.After 12 weeks' therapy,all the patients' medium value of ACQ was decreased significantly from 2.03(adults 2.20,children 1.74) at baseline to 0.60(adults 0.78,children 0.29)(P<0.0001),and the medium value of ACQ5 was also decreased significantly from 2.4(adults 2.24,children 1.76) at baseline to 0.47(adults 0.62,children 0.20)(P<0.0001).Conclusion Budesonide/formoterol is effective in asthma treatment,by which most asthma patients obtain and maintain clincal control.

Empirical Performance of a New User Cohort Method: Lessons for Developing a Risk Identification and Analysis System

Overall asthma control: the relationship between current control and future risk

Budesonide/formoterol for maintenance and reliever therapy of asthma: a meta analysis of randomised controlled trials

Positioning As-needed Budesonide–Formoterol for Mild Asthma: Effect of Prestudy Treatment in Pooled Analysis of SYGMA 1 and 2

Systematic review and meta-analysis of budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler

A Multicenter, Cross-Sectional, Observational Study of Budesonide/Formoterol Maintenance and Reliever Therapy in Real-World Settings

Budesonide/formoterol or budesonide/albuterol as anti-inflammatory reliever therapy for asthma

Budesonide/formoterol: a review of its use in asthma

Comparison of early effects of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy with fluticasone furoate/vilanterol for asthma patients requiring step-up from inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy

Budesonide/Formoterol Maintenance and Reliever Therapy in Chinese Patients with Asthma

Treatment of persistent asthma with Symbicort (budesonide/formoterol inhalation aerosol): an inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting beta2-adrenergic agonist in one pressurized metered-dose inhaler

Effect of budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy on asthma exacerbations

Budesonide/formoterol maintenance and reliever therapy in adolescent patients with asthma

Efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol single inhaler therapy versus a higher dose of budesonide in moderate to severe asthma

Budesonide-formoterol reliever therapy versus maintenance budesonide plus terbutaline reliever therapy in adults with mild to moderate asthma (PRACTICAL): a 52-week, open-label, multicentre, superiority, randomised controlled trial

Effect of budesonide in combination with formoterol for reliever therapy in asthma exacerbations: a randomised controlled, double-blind study

Step-in step-down approach in the management of bronchial asthma in adolescents and adults

Budesonide and Formoterol in a Single Inhaler Improves Asthma Control Compared With Increasing the Dose of Corticosteroid in Adults With Mild-to-Moderate Asthma

Combination formoterol and budesonide as maintenance and reliever therapy versus combination inhaler maintenance for chronic asthma in adults and children

Structure and phase transformation of ferromagnetic shape memory alloy Ni/sub 49/Mn/sub 30/Ga/sub 21/ fine particles prepared by spark erosion

A Three-Month Non-Interventional Study of Asthma Treatment with Budesonide/Formoterol