Abstract:Background: International guidelines advocate using daily inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the management of children and adults with persistent asthma. However, in real world clinical settings, these medicines are often used at irregular intervals by patients. Recent evidence suggests that the use of intermittent ICS, with treatment initiated at the time of early symptoms, may still have benefits for reducing the severity of an asthma exacerbation. Objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of intermittent ICS versus placebo in the management of children and adults diagnosed with, or suspected to have, symptoms of mild persistent asthma. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), the ClinicalTrials.gov website and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal in March 2015. Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared intermittent ICS versus placebo in children and adults with symptoms of persistent asthma. No co-interventions were permitted other than rescue relievers and oral corticosteroids used during exacerbations. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, methodological quality and extracted data. The primary efficacy outcome was the risk of asthma exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids and the primary safety outcome was serious adverse health events. Secondary outcomes included exacerbations, lung function tests, asthma control, adverse effects, and withdrawal rates. Quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE criteria. Main results: Six trials (representing 490 preschool children, 145 school-aged children and 240 adults) met the inclusion criteria. Study durations were 12 to 52 weeks. Results for preschool children were presented in a separate analysis as this represents a distinct clinical condition, not necessarily related to the development of long term asthma.There was a reduction in the risk of patients experiencing one or more exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids in older children (145 participants, odds ratio (OR) 0.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 1.12, low quality evidence) and adults with asthma (240 participants, OR 0.10; 95% CI 0.01 to 1.95, low quality evidence). These analyses were each based on the findings of a single study. No group difference was observed in the risk of serious adverse health events (385 participants; OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.14 to 7.25, moderate quality evidence). Compared to the placebo group, there was an insufficient number of participants to make firm conclusions whether the intermittent ICS group displayed any reduction in the rate of hospitalisations, day time and night time symptoms scores, or adverse events. Lung function tests reported by a single study favoured the use of ICS. There was no significant group difference in growth rate of children, or overall withdrawals.In preschool children with frequent wheezing episodes, the use of intermittent ICS at the onset of early symptoms reduced the likelihood of requiring rescue oral corticosteroids by half (490 participants; OR: 0.48; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.73, moderate quality evidence with minimal heterogeneity). Intermittent therapy was associated with fewer serious adverse events (439 participants; OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.02, low quality evidence). There was no significant difference in hospitalisations or in a single study measuring parent perceived quality of life. However, intermittent therapy was associated with improvements in both day time and night time symptoms. There was no increase in the rates of withdrawals, and overall and treatment-specific adverse events. Authors' conclusions: In children and adults with mild persistent asthma, two studies have shown that the use of intermittent ICS at the time of exacerbation reduced the chances of needing oral corticosteroids by half. This result is statistically significant if we assume that the effect size is the same for each study population (fixed effects model), but is not statistically significant when using a random effects model. However, the paucity of published evidence limits our conclusions towards the 'as-needed' use of this medication. The small number of studies and participants were the major reasons for downgrading the overall quality of the findings. A corresponding result was found in preschool children with wheeze. In this age group, an improvement in day time and night time asthma symptoms score and parental perceived quality of life of children similarly favoured the ICS group. However, there was no statistical difference in hospitalisation rates in any group. This treatment was not associated with any significant increase in adverse events. There was no growth suppression noted with the use of intermittent ICS in either preschool or school-aged children. Considering the limited number of available studies, we emphasise the need for more randomised controlled studies in order to confirm these findings.

The Follow-Up Study of Stepping Down Inhaled Corticosteroids in Childhood Asthma

Effects of asthma and inhaled corticosteroids in children on the ifnal adult height：a systemic review and Meta analysis

[IS INHALED CORTICOSTEROID STEP-DOWN RECOMMENDED FOR ADULT ASTHMA PATIENTS HAVE BEEN WELL CONTROLLED OVER THE LONG TERM WITH MODERATE OR HIGH-DOSE INHALED CORTICOSTEROIDS?]

Intermittent inhaled corticosteroid therapy versus placebo for persistent asthma in children and adults

Withdrawal of Inhaled Corticosteroids from Patients with COPD; Effect on Exacerbation Frequency and Lung Function: A Systematic Review

Treatment of Pediatric Mild Persistent Asthma with Low-Dose Budesonide Inhalation Suspension Vs.montelukast in China

Inhaled Budesonide vis-à-vis Inhaled Mometasone in Chinese Children with Mild Persistent Asthma: A Single-Center, Retrospective Study

Long-term observations of the clinical course after step down of corticosteroid inhalation therapy in adult chronic asthmatics: correlation with serum levels of eosinophil cationic protein

Predictive markers of asthma exacerbation during stepwise dose reduction of inhaled corticosteroids

EFFECTS OF REDUCING OR DISCONTINUING INHALED BUDESONIDE IN PATIENTS WITH MILD ASTHMA

Low Variability in Peak Expiratory Flow Predicts Successful Inhaled Corticosteroid Step-Down in Adults with Asthma

Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids versus continuation of triple therapy in patients with COPD in real life: observational comparative effectiveness study

Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids from patients with COPD with mild or moderate airflow limitation in primary care: a feasibility randomised trial

Inhaled corticosteroid withdrawal may improve outcomes in elderly patients with COPD exacerbation: a nationwide database study

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

Impact of Inhaled Corticosteroid Treatment on 15-Year Longitudinal Respiratory Function Changes in Adult Patients with Bronchial Asthma

Nebulized Step-Down Budesonide Vs. Fluticasone in Infantile Asthma: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Inhaled Corticosteroid Treatment Regimens and Health Outcomes in a UK COPD Population Study

Discontinuation of Inhaled Corticosteroids from Triple Therapy in COPD: Effects on Major Outcomes in Real World Clinical Practice

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

Safety of Long-Term Use of Asthma Controller Drugs