PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16138939

Achieving asthma control.

Abstract

The number of people with asthma continues to grow around the world. However, despite the availability of highly effective medication it remains a poorly controlled disease. Reasons for this poor control include non-implementation and inherent limitations of the asthma management guidelines, poor compliance with asthma therapy, incorrect use of inhaler devices and insufficient treatment of peripheral airway inflammation. Guidelines may not be efficiently implemented as they may be complicated and difficult to understand. In addition, the scientific evidence upon which they are based, although the best available at the present time, is flawed. Patient non-compliance with therapy is a major reason for poor asthma control. Patients fail to comply with their asthma regimen for a wide variety of reasons, but incorrect use of inhaler devices is amongst the most common. Most patients derive incomplete benefit from pressurised metered dose inhalers (pMDIs) as they are unable to use them correctly. Dry powder inhalers (DPIs) have several advantages over pMDIs; they are breath-activated (avoiding coordination difficulties between actuation and inhalation), easy and convenient to use, and environmentally friendly. Although there are many treatments for asthma currently in development, it is unlikely that significant improvements in inhaled medication will occur within the next 15 years. Therefore, improvement in asthma management will be facilitated by improvements in inhaler technology. When choosing an inhaler device it is essential that it is easy to use correctly, dosing is consistent, adequate drug is deposited in the lungs (both central and peripheral airways) and that drug deposition is independent of airflow.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Peter J Barnes. 2005. Achieving asthma control.. https://doi.org/10.1185/030079905x61730

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

An efficient design for a study comparing two drugs, their combination and placebo.

A novel design for a study comparing two drugs (A and B), their combination (AB) and placebo (P) in a stable disease such as chronic asthma is proposed. The primary objectives of the trial are to compare A (a new drug) with placebo and AB with B (an old drug). Other between-treatment comparisons are secondary. The new design consists of the first 2 sequences of a single 4 x 4 Latin square: (A, AB, P, B|P, B, A, AB|AB, A, B, P|B, P, AB, A). The washout period between A and AB and that between P and B are eliminated based on the assumptions that there is no carry-over effect from placebo and that the effect of the combination would be approximately same at steady state either starting the 2 drugs at the same time or adding one later. Equal period effect for Periods 1 and 2, and for Periods 3 and 4 are also assumed for all treatment effects being estimable. Advantages and disadvantages of this design were evaluated and compared with other possible designs. Compared with other possible designs, the new design is more efficient. For example, the new design requires less than (1/4) of the sample size a parallel design would need and it requires (2/3) of the sample size a 4-treatment, 3-period incomplete block design would need for the same power at the same detectable difference. It has a similar efficiency to a 4-treatment, 4-period cross-over design but with a shorter duration. In this design, all between-treatment comparisons are based on direct within-subject information. The new design could also potentially decrease the probability of patient's drop-outs and use of rescue medication due to lack of efficacy during the placebo periods by reducing the number of placebo washout periods. The benefits reaped from the new design seem to outweigh its risks, which include potential bias for the secondary between-treatment comparisons if the additional assumption about period effects are not satisfied and the incapability of directly assessing the onset of action of the combination of 2 drugs.

Anti-Asthmatic Agents↗

Theophylline and dexamethasone induce peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma expression in human eosinophils.

Eosinophils are major effector cells in allergic diseases including asthma. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma (PPARgamma) is a nuclear receptor that regulates immune reaction. We have previously demonstrated that human eosinophils express PPARgamma and that stimulation with a synthetic agonist for PPARgamma attenuated the factor-induced eosinophil survival and chemotaxis. However, the modulator of the eosinophil PPARgamma expression has not yet been studied. In this study, we investigated the effect of theophylline and dexamethasone (widely used drugs in the treatment of asthma) on PPARgamma expression in eosinophils. Purified human peripheral blood eosinophils were cultured, and therapeutic concentrations of theophylline and dexamethasone were added. Subsequently, PPARgamma was measured using quantitative real-time RT-PCR and flow cytometry. Theophylline and dexamethasone markedly enhanced both mRNA and protein levels of PPARgamma. These findings suggest that the increase in PPARgamma expression on eosinophils may play a role in the anti-inflammatory effects of theophylline and dexamethasone.

Anti-Asthmatic Agents↗