Cargando…
A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation
CONTEXT: The combination of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) is widely used in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma uncontrolled by ICS alone. AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new ICS-LABA combination inhaler containing Formoterol (F) and Cicleso...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4857562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27185990 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-2113.180803 |
_version_ | 1782430671127445504 |
---|---|
author | Salvi, Sundeep S Vaidya, Abhijit J Kodgule, Rahul R Gogtay, Jaideep A |
author_facet | Salvi, Sundeep S Vaidya, Abhijit J Kodgule, Rahul R Gogtay, Jaideep A |
author_sort | Salvi, Sundeep S |
collection | PubMed |
description | CONTEXT: The combination of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) is widely used in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma uncontrolled by ICS alone. AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new ICS-LABA combination inhaler containing Formoterol (F) and Ciclesonide (C). SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group fashion, multi-centric study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 169 asthma patients received Ciclesonide 80 μg once daily during a 4-week run-in period, after which, they were randomized to receive either C (80 μg) or a combination of F (4.5 μg) and C (80 μg) (FC) both delivered through a hydro-fluro-alkane pressurized-metered-dose inhaler as 1 puff twice daily, for 6 weeks. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Inter-group differences were compared using t-test for independent samples at a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: From baseline, the improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 s at 1, 3, and 6 weeks was significantly higher in the FC group compared to Group C (110 ml vs. 40 ml, 140 ml vs. 20 ml, and 110 ml vs. 40 ml, respectively, all P < 0.05). From baseline, the improvements in mean morning peak expiratory flow at 1, 3, and 6 weeks was significantly higher in the FC group compared to Group C (17 L/min vs.−3 L/min, 22 L/min vs. 3 L/min, and 30 ml vs. 8 L/min respectively, all P < 0.05). The changes in symptom scores were similar in both the groups. The adverse events in the FC group were not significantly different from those in the C group. CONCLUSIONS: FC provides better improvement than C alone in terms of lung function and symptoms without increased risk of adverse events in asthma patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4857562 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48575622016-05-16 A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation Salvi, Sundeep S Vaidya, Abhijit J Kodgule, Rahul R Gogtay, Jaideep A Lung India Original Article CONTEXT: The combination of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) is widely used in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma uncontrolled by ICS alone. AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new ICS-LABA combination inhaler containing Formoterol (F) and Ciclesonide (C). SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group fashion, multi-centric study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 169 asthma patients received Ciclesonide 80 μg once daily during a 4-week run-in period, after which, they were randomized to receive either C (80 μg) or a combination of F (4.5 μg) and C (80 μg) (FC) both delivered through a hydro-fluro-alkane pressurized-metered-dose inhaler as 1 puff twice daily, for 6 weeks. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Inter-group differences were compared using t-test for independent samples at a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: From baseline, the improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 s at 1, 3, and 6 weeks was significantly higher in the FC group compared to Group C (110 ml vs. 40 ml, 140 ml vs. 20 ml, and 110 ml vs. 40 ml, respectively, all P < 0.05). From baseline, the improvements in mean morning peak expiratory flow at 1, 3, and 6 weeks was significantly higher in the FC group compared to Group C (17 L/min vs.−3 L/min, 22 L/min vs. 3 L/min, and 30 ml vs. 8 L/min respectively, all P < 0.05). The changes in symptom scores were similar in both the groups. The adverse events in the FC group were not significantly different from those in the C group. CONCLUSIONS: FC provides better improvement than C alone in terms of lung function and symptoms without increased risk of adverse events in asthma patients. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4857562/ /pubmed/27185990 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-2113.180803 Text en Copyright: © Lung India http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Salvi, Sundeep S Vaidya, Abhijit J Kodgule, Rahul R Gogtay, Jaideep A A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation |
title | A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation |
title_full | A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation |
title_fullStr | A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation |
title_full_unstemmed | A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation |
title_short | A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation |
title_sort | randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4857562/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27185990 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0970-2113.180803 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT salvisundeeps arandomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation AT vaidyaabhijitj arandomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation AT kodgulerahulr arandomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation AT gogtayjaideepa arandomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation AT salvisundeeps randomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation AT vaidyaabhijitj randomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation AT kodgulerahulr randomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation AT gogtayjaideepa randomizeddoubleblindstudycomparingtheefficacyandsafetyofacombinationofformoterolandciclesonidewithciclesonidealoneinasthmasubjectswithmoderatetosevereairflowlimitation |