SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Fluticasone”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

Randomized placebo-controlled trial comparing fluticasone aqueous nasal spray in mono-therapy, fluticasone plus cetirizine, fluticasone plus montelukast and cetirizine plus montelukast for seasonal allergic rhinitis.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are considered to be particularly effective in reducing nasal congestion and are therefore recommended as first-line treatment in allergic rhinitis patients with moderate to severe and/or persistent symptoms. OBJECTIVE: We compared the clinical efficacy of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal spray (FPANS) 200 microg given once daily, administered in mono-therapy or combined therapy with a H1 receptor antagonist (cetirizine, CTZ) or with a leukotriene antagonist (montelukast, MSK), and the combined therapy of CTZ plus MSK in the treatment of patients affected by allergic rhinitis to Parietaria during natural pollen exposure. In addition, we examined the effect of the treatment on eosinophil counts and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) in nasal lavage performed at beginning of season, during season and at the end of the season. METHODS: One hundred patients aged 12-50 years (mean+/-SD 31.8+/-9.6) with a history of moderate to severe Parietaria pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis were selected. A randomized, double-blind, double dummy, placebo (PLA)-controlled, parallel-group study design was used. Patients were treated FPANS 200 microg once daily (n=20) or with FPANS 200 microg once daily, plus CTZ (10 mg) in the morning (n=20), or with FPANS 200 microg once daily, plus MSK (10 mg) in the evening (n=20) or with CTZ (10 mg) in the morning plus MSK in the evening (n=20) or matched PLA (n=20). Assessment of efficacy was based on scores of daily nasal symptoms and on eosinophil counts and ECP in nasal lavage. RESULTS: All treatments showed significant differences (P<0.001) compared with PLA in terms of total symptom, rhinorrhea, sneezing and nasal itching scores. Concerning nasal congestion on waking and daily only the groups treated with FPANS in mono-therapy or in combined therapy showed significant differences compared with PLA. Comparing the group treated with FPANS alone and the groups treated with FPANS plus CTZ, we found significant differences for total symptom score (P=0.04) and for nasal itching (P=0.003). The comparison between FPANS plus CTZ and FPANS plus MSK showed significant difference for nasal itching (P=0.003). Finally, there were significant differences between the group treated with FPANS and the group treated with CTZ plus MSK for total symptom score (P=0.009), for nasal congestion on waking (P<0.001) and nasal congestion daily (P<0.001). Also the comparisons between the group treated with FPANS plus CTZ and the group treated with CTZ plus MSK demonstrated significant differences (P<0.001) for total symptom, for nasal congestion on waking and for nasal congestion on daily, for rhinorrhea (P=0.04) and for nasal itching (P=0.003) scores. Concerning the comparison between the group treated with FPANS plus MSK and the group treated with CTZ plus MSK we found significant differences for total symptom score (P=0.005), for nasal congestion on waking (P<0.001) and for nasal congestion on daily (P<0.001). No other differences were observed between the groups. Concerning blood eosinophil counts, significant differences were found between the treatments with FPANS in mono-therapy or in combined therapy with PLA group during and at the end of the season (P=0.0003 and P<0.0001, respectively). Concerning eosinophils and ECP in nasal lavage, all treatments showed significant differences (P<0.001) compared with PLA. Besides, there were significant differences (P<0.001) between the groups treated with FPANS alone or in combined therapy and the group treated with CTZ plus MSK. CONCLUSION: The results of this comparative study demonstrate that FPANS is highly effective for treating patients affected by allergic rhinitis, with efficacy exceeding that of CTZ plus MSK in combined therapy. In addition, the regular combined therapy of FPANS plus CTZ or plus MSK would not seem to offer substantial advantage with respect to FPANS in mono-therapy in patients affected by seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Acetates↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Fluticasone propionate 50 micrograms BID versus 100 micrograms BID in the treatment of children with persistent asthma. Fluticasone Propionate Study Group.

The aim of this multicenter, double-masked study was to compare the efficacy and safety of two different doses of inhaled fluticasone propionate dry powder--50 micrograms and 100 micrograms--administered BID via a multidose powder inhaler with those of placebo in the treatment of children with persistent asthma. After a 2-week run-in period, 263 patients were randomized to treatment with twice-daily placebo (n = 92), fluticasone 50 micrograms (n = 85), or fluticasone 100 micrograms (n = 86) for 12 weeks. One hundred sixty-six (63%) patients were male, and 224 (85%) were white, with a mean age of 8 years. Two hundred twenty-one (84%) patients were atopic, and 167 (63%) had been asthmatic for 1 to 5 years. Baseline mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) values were 207 L/min, 199 L/min, and 194 L/min, and baseline percentages of predicted normal values were 86%, 80%, and 81% for the groups receiving placebo, fluticasone 50 micrograms, and fluticasone 100 micrograms, respectively. At the end of the first week of treatment, patients in both fluticasone groups had significantly greater improvements in morning PEF than did those receiving placebo. Patients experienced mean increases of 4 L/min, 22 L/min, and 26 L/min with placebo, fluticasone 50 micrograms, and fluticasone 100 micrograms, respectively. At the end point (the last evaluable visit), patients in both fluticasone groups continued to have significantly greater improvements in morning PEF than did patients receiving placebo. Patients experienced mean increases of 17 L/min, 50 L/min, and 57 L/min with placebo, fluticasone 50 micrograms, and fluticasone 100 micrograms, respectively. Changes in the percentage of predicted values by end point were 8%, 20%, and 26% with placebo, fluticasone 50 micrograms, and fluticasone 100 micrograms, respectively. The probability of remaining in the study, according to predefined withdrawal criteria, indicated a significant treatment difference in favor of fluticasone. Withdrawal criteria were met by 63%, 42%, and 29% of patients receiving placebo, fluticasone 50 micrograms, and fluticasone 100 micrograms, respectively. This study clearly demonstrates the superiority of fluticasone 50 and 100 micrograms BID over placebo in the treatment of persistent asthma in children.

Administration, Inhalation↗

PubMed2004

Effect of fluticasone propionate and salmeterol in a single device, fluticasone propionate, and montelukast on overall asthma control, exacerbations, and costs.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled corticosteroids are the most effective class of anti-inflammatory agents and are recommended for patients with persistent asthma. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of (1) fluticasone propionate, 100 microg, and salmeterol, 50 microg; (2) fluticasone propionate, 100 microg; and (3) montelukast, 10 mg, as first-line maintenance treatment for persistent asthma. METHODS: Combined analysis of 4 clinical trials, 2 that compared fluticasone propionate-salmeterol with montelukast and 2 that compared fluticasone propionate with montelukast as initial asthma therapy. RESULTS: The 4 studies had a total of 1,910 patients 15 years or older with symptomatic asthma previously treated with inhaled short-acting beta2-agonists alone. At the end point, there were significantly greater increases in forced expiratory volume in 1 second with fluticasone propionate-salmeterol (0.57 L; P < or = .004) vs fluticasone propionate (0.48 L) and montelukast (0.31 L) and significantly greater increases in morning peak expiratory flow rate (84.9 L/min; P < .001) vs fluticasone propionate (56.0 L/min) and montelukast (36.1 L/min). Fluticasone propionate-salmeterol significantly increased the percentage of symptom- and rescue-free days and significantly reduced albuterol use vs fluticasone propionate and montelukast (P < or = .04 for both). Patients treated with fluticasone propionate and montelukast had 2.6 and 3.6 greater risk, respectively, of having an asthma-related exacerbation vs fluticasone propionate-salmeterol users. In addition, mean daily exacerbation costs per treated patient were dollars 0.41 for fluticasone propionate-salmeterol, dollars 4.60 for fluticasone propionate, and dollars 7.57 for montelukast, whereas mean daily costs per patient exacerbation for fluticasone propionate-salmeterol, fluticasone propionate, and montelukast were dollars 29, dollars 128, and dollars 154, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with symptomatic asthma previously treated with short-acting beta2-agonists only who require maintenance therapy are likely to have greater clinical benefits, lower risk of an asthma exacerbation, and reduced exacerbation-related costs when initiating therapy with fluticasone propionate-salmeterol vs fluticasone propionate or montelukast.

Acetates↗

PubMed2002

Comparison of the efficacy of combined fluticasone propionate and olopatadine versus combined fluticasone propionate and fexofenadine for the treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis induced by conjunctival allergen challenge.

BACKGROUND: One approach to treating allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is the concomitant use of an intranasal spray such as fluticasone propionate to alleviate nasal symptoms and a topical or systemic agent to relieve ocular symptoms. It has not yet been determined whether a topical or systemic agent is more effective for the latter purpose. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy of combined use of fluticasone and olopatadine with combined use of fluticasone and fexofenadine in the treatment of the signs and symptoms of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. METHODS: This 2-site, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study employed the conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) model, a standardized method of inducing ocular and nasal signs and symptoms of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis. At visit 1, subjects underwent CAC to determine the dose of allergen required to elicit a positive reaction. The allergen dose was confirmed at visit 2, and, according to a randomization schedule, subjects were dispensed fluticasone, olopatadine, and placebo pill; fluticasone, fexofenadine, and tear substitute; or placebo nasal spray, placebo pill, and tear substitute. CAC took place at visit 3, after patients had used the assigned medications for 2 weeks. Study medication was instilled 2 hours before CAC, after which allergic signs and symptoms were graded on standardized scales. The primary efficacy variables were ocular itching, ocular redness, and overall nasal symptoms. RESULTS: Eighty subjects completed the study: 30 received fluticasone and olopatadine, 30 fluticasone and fexofenadine, and 20 placebo. Women constituted 63.8% of the study population and men 36.3%; 91.3% were white, 3.8% black, 2.5% Hispanic, 1.3% Asian, and 1.3% other. Concomitant use of fluticasone and olopatadine produced significantly greater improvements in ocular itching at 3 and 7 minutes after CAC compared with fluticasone and fexofenadine (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in redness scores between groups; however, concomitant use of fluticasone and olopatadine produced significantly greater improvements in redness at 2 time points in each of the 3 vessel beds (ciliary, conjunctival, and episcleral) compared with placebo, and fluticasone and fexofenadine produced significantly greater improvement in redness at 1 time point in I vessel bed compared with placebo (both comparisons, P < 0.05). The 2 treatments had similar effects on total nasal symptom efficacy scores. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, concomitant use of the topical agents fluticasone and olopatadine was more effective than concomitant use of fluticasone plus fexofenadine for overall treatment of the signs and symptoms of induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

Administration, Intranasal↗

PubMed2003

Montelukast and fluticasone compared with salmeterol and fluticasone in protecting against asthma exacerbation in adults: one year, double blind, randomised, comparative trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of montelukast versus salmeterol added to inhaled fluticasone propionate on asthma exacerbation in patients whose symptoms are inadequately controlled with fluticasone alone. Design and setting A 52 week, two period, double blind, multicentre trial during which patients whose symptoms remained uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids were randomised to add montelukast or salmeterol. PARTICIPANTS: Patients (15-72 years; n = 1490) had a clinical history of chronic asthma for > or = 1 year, a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) value 50-90% predicted, and a beta agonist improvement of > or = 12% in FEV1. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was the percentage of patients with at least one asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: 20.1% of the patients in the group receiving montelukast and fluticasone had an asthma exacerbation compared with 19.1% in the group receiving salmeterol and fluticasone; the difference was 1% (95% confidence interval -3.1% to 5.0%). With a risk ratio (montelukast-fluticasone/salmeterol-fluticasone) of 1.05 (0.86 to 1.29), treatment with montelukast and fluticasone was shown to be non-inferior to treatment with salmeterol and fluticasone. Salmeterol and fluticasone significantly increased FEV1 before a beta agonist was used and morning peak expiratory flow compared with montelukast and fluticasone (P < or = 0.001), whereas FEV1 after a beta agonist was used and improvements in asthma specific quality of life and nocturnal awakenings were similar between the groups. Montelukast and fluticasone significantly (P = 0.011) reduced peripheral blood eosinophil counts compared with salmeterol and fluticasone. Both treatments were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The addition of montelukast in patients whose symptoms remain uncontrolled by inhaled fluticasone could provide equivalent clinical control to salmeterol.

Acetates↗

PubMed1994

Fluticasone propionate aerosol for the treatment of adults with mild to moderate asthma. The Fluticasone Propionate Asthma Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Recent emphasis on the control of airway inflammation in asthma highlights the need for safe and effective antiinflammatory agents. Fluticasone propionate is one of the most potent antiinflammatory corticosteroids developed to date. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the safety and efficacy of fluticasone propionate aerosol in the treatment of mild to moderate asthma. METHODS: Fluticasone propionate aerosol (25, 100, or 500 micrograms twice daily) or placebo was given for as long as 8 weeks to adults with mild to moderate asthma in a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Patients were removed from the study if they showed predefined signs of worsening asthma. RESULTS: Sixty-three percent of placebo-treated patients and 23%, 13%, and 4% of patients treated with fluticasone propionate 25, 100, and 500 micrograms twice daily, respectively, were removed from the study. Mean forced expiratory volume in 1 second, forced vital capacity, and forced expiratory flow at midexpiratory phase at weekly visits throughout the study demonstrated that fluticasone propionate was more efficacious than placebo in maintaining asthma control. Measurements of peak expiratory flow and symptom scores significantly improved and nighttime awakenings and albuterol use to treat symptoms significantly declined in fluticasone propionate-treated groups relative to the placebo-treated group. Differences among fluticasone propionate groups for these variables were not statistically significant. Incidence and severity of adverse events were similar across groups. Fluticasone propionate did not affect morning or stimulated plasma cortisol concentrations, although slight, transient reductions in urinary free cortisol and urinary 17-hydroxy steroids occurred in the group receiving 500 micrograms fluticasone propionate twice daily. CONCLUSION: These data indicate that fluticasone propionate provides safe and effective treatment for mild to moderate asthma.

Administration, Topical↗

PubMed2004

Fluticasone propionate and salmeterol administered via Diskus compared with salmeterol or fluticasone propionate alone in patients suboptimally controlled with short-acting beta2-agonists.

BACKGROUND: Optimal therapy for many patients with persistent asthma requires control of both main components of this disease: inflammation and bronchoconstriction. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of initiating maintenance therapy with an inhaled, long-acting beta2-agonist and an inhaled corticosteroid administered from a single device with that of the individual agents alone. METHODS: A 12-week, randomized, double-blind study was conducted in patients 12 years and older with persistent asthma who were symptomatic while taking as-needed, short-acting beta2-agonists alone. Treatments were administered twice daily via the Diskus device: salmeterol, 50 microg; fluticasone propionate, 100 microg; or fluticasone propionate, 100 microg, with salmeterol, 50 microg. RESULTS: Of 555 patients screened, 267 were randomly assigned to treatment. At end point, fluticasone propionate and salmeterol significantly increased predose forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) compared with salmeterol alone (0.51 +/- 0.05 L vs 0.38 +/- 0.04 L, P = .04). Fluticasone propionate and salmeterol significantly increased area under the serial FEV1 curve at treatment week 12 relative to predose FEV1 (baseline) on treatment day 1 (AUCb1, 8.4 +/- 0.6 L/h; P < or = .02) compared with salmeterol (6.2 +/- 0.5 L/h) and fluticasone propionate (7.0 +/- 0.6 L/h). Fluticasone propionate and salmeterol were significantly (P < or = .02) more effective than the individual agents used alone in improving morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate and asthma symptoms. In addition, fluticasone propionate and salmeterol effectively reduced rescue albuterol use (P < or = .04). All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In patients symptomatic while taking short-acting beta2-agonists alone, initial maintenance treatment of the 2 main components of asthma, inflammation and smooth muscle dysfunction, with fluticasone propionate and salmeterol, 100 and 50 microg, administered via the Diskus results in greater improvements in overall asthma control compared with treatment of either component alone.

Administration, Inhalation↗

PubMed2004

Efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler vs fluticasone propionate metered-dose inhaler in asthma subjects previously using fluticasone propionate.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler (DPI) administered once daily in the evening with fluticasone propionate metered-dose inhaler (MDI) administered twice daily. METHODS: An 8-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study compared mometasone furoate DPI, 400 microg every evening (1 puff daily), with fluticasone propionate MDI, two 125-microg puffs twice daily, in 167 adults and adolescents with moderate persistent asthma previously using fluticasone propionate. The primary efficacy variable was the change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) from baseline to the end point. Variables such as response to therapy and subject satisfaction with the inhaler devices were also analyzed. RESULTS: Improvement in FEV1 was noted at the week 2 visit with both treatments. This improvement was maintained at the 4- and 8-week visits and at the end point for both groups. The mean percent change in FEV1 from baseline to the end point was 4.58% with mometasone furoate DPI and 6.98% with fluticasone propionate MDI (P = .35). At the end point, physicians rated 62% of the mometasone furoate DPI group as "improved" or "much improved" compared with 47% of the fluticasone propionate MDI group (P = .007). A significantly greater proportion of subjects in the mometasone furoate DPI group "liked the inhaler a lot" vs subjects in the fluticasone propionate MDI group (46.8% vs 22.4%; P = .01). Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Mometasone furoate DPI, 400 microg every evening, provided comparable efficacy as fluticasone propionate MDI, two 125-microg puffs twice daily, in subjects with moderate persistent asthma previously treated with fluticasone propionate.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Fluticasone versus salmeterol/low-dose fluticasone for long-term asthma control.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative clinical superiority of increasing the dose of fluticasone propionate versus the addition of salmeterol to low-dose fluticasone propionate for long-term asthma control. DATA SOURCES: Literature was identified by a MEDLINE search (1966-October 2002). Key search terms included asthma, inhalation, corticosteroid, beta-adrenergic agonist, and combination drug therapy. DATA SYNTHESIS: Current guidelines for long-term control of asthma include treatment with either inhaled corticosteroids (medium dose) or inhaled corticosteroids (low to medium dose) in combination with a long-acting bronchodilator. Previous studies evaluating salmeterol or formoterol combination therapy with beclomethasone or budesonide have generally produced superior results compared with increasing the dose of the inhaled corticosteroid. Four recent controlled clinical trials have compared the clinical utility of fluticasone propionate monotherapy versus salmeterol/low-dose fluticasone propionate for long-term asthma control in patients with moderate to severe persistent asthma. Based on spirometry data, rescue albuterol use, and symptom scores, the addition of salmeterol to low-dose fluticasone propionate was superior to increasing the dose of fluticasone propionate. CONCLUSIONS: Based on improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 second, peak expiratory flow, and symptom control, the addition of salmeterol to low-dose fluticasone propionate provides better control of asthma than increasing the dose of fluticasone propionate.

Albuterol↗

PubMed1994

Treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis with once-daily intranasal fluticasone propionate therapy in children. Fluticasone Propionate Collaborative Pediatric Working Group.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of intranasally administered fluticasone propionate, 200 micrograms or 100 micrograms (half the adult dosage) when administered once daily for 4 weeks to children with seasonal allergic rhinitis. DESIGN AND SETTING: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical study in 10 pediatric outpatient centers. SUBJECTS: Children (n = 249), 4 to 11 years of age, with moderate to severe symptoms of seasonal allergic rhinitis, positive skin test reaction to a local autumn allergen, and a history of seasonal allergic rhinitis. MEASUREMENTS: Clinician- and patient-rated nasal symptom scores (obstruction, rhinorrhea, sneezing, itching), clinician-rated assessment of overall response to treatment, patient-rated nasal obstruction on awakening, and use of rescue medication. Clinicians questioned patients (or parents) regarding symptoms and adverse events. Morning plasma cortisol concentrations and 24-hour urinary excretion of cortisol and 17-ketogenic steroids were evaluated. RESULTS: Intranasal fluticasone propionate, 200 micrograms or 100 micrograms once daily, was significantly more effective than placebo in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis in children. Clinician- and patient-rated symptom scores indicated greater improvement in nasal symptoms, including nasal obstruction on awakening, among patients receiving intranasal fluticasone propionate. Overall response to treatment was also significantly greater in the active treatment groups. The two fluticasone propionate groups were not statistically different. Mean morning plasma cortisol concentrations and 24-hour urinary excretion of free cortisol and 17-ketogenic steroids were similar across all groups both before and after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal fluticasone propionate, 100 micrograms (half the adult dose) or 200 micrograms given once daily for 4 weeks is effective and well tolerated in children 4 to 11 years of age with seasonal allergic rhinitis.

Administration, Intranasal↗

PubMed1998

Growth in asthmatic children treated with fluticasone propionate. Fluticasone Propionate Asthma Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether inhaled fluticasone propionate has long-term effects on growth in children with persistent asthma. STUDY DESIGN: In a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, multicenter study, 325 prepubescent children with persistent asthma and normal growth rates were treated with placebo or inhaled fluticasone propionate powder 50 microg or 100 microg administered twice daily by a breath-actuated device for 1 year. Growth was evaluated monthly, whereas other safety variables and pulmonary function were evaluated periodically. RESULTS: The prepubescent patients showed no statistically significant differences in mean height, mean growth velocity, or mean skeletal age between any of the treatment groups at any time. Over a period of 1 year, mean height (+/- SE) increased 6.15 +/- 0.17 cm in the placebo group, 5.94 +/- 0.16 cm in the fluticasone propionate 50 microg group, and 5.73 +/- 0.13 cm in the fluticasone propionate 100 microg group (p = 0.308, overall). CONCLUSIONS: Prepubescent children treated with fluticasone propionate 50 microg and 100 microg administered twice daily for 1 year grew at rates similar to placebo-treated control subjects and at rates equal to expected growth velocity for age.

Administration, Inhalation↗

PubMed1996

Fluticasone propionate aerosol: efficacy in patients with mild to moderate asthma. Fluticasone Propionate Asthma Study Group.

BACKGROUND: This double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of fluticasone propionate aerosol (25, 50, or 100 mg bid for 12 weeks) administered as primary maintenance therapy to patients whose mild to moderate asthma was inadequately controlled by as-needed use of an inhaled beta-agonist. RESULTS: At all clinic visits, fluticasone propionate compared with placebo was associated with significant (P<.05) improvement in pulmonary function indexed by forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) as well as fewer night awakenings and less use of rescue albuterol. Values for patient-measured morning peak expiratory flow rates (PEFR) were significantly (P<.05) higher and the use of rescue albuterol was significantly (P<.05) lower beginning 3 to 5 days after initiation of therapy in the groups treated with fluticasone propionate, compared with the placebo group. Maximal improvement in FEV1 was achieved during the second week of treatment and maintained throughout the course of therapy. Differences among the three fluticasone propionate dosing groups for these efficacy measures were not statistically significant. The incidence of adverse events was similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that fluticasone propionate aerosol is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for asthma and significantly improves pulmonary function within days of initiation of treatment in patients whose asthma is inadequately controlled with as-needed beta-agonists.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Effects of fluticasone plus salmeterol versus twice the dose of fluticasone in asthmatic patients.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines advocate adding a long acting beta(2)-agonist (LABA) to an inhaled corticosteroid as an alternative to increasing the dose of the latter. Since it is unclear how this translates into effects on surrogate inflammatory markers, we evaluated the anti-inflammatory activity of fluticasone plus salmeterol in combination versus twice the dose of fluticasone alone. METHODS: Fifteen mild-to-moderate asthmatics (mean FEV(1) 80% predicted) uncontrolled on inhaled corticosteroids (mean dose 470 microg) were randomised in a single-blind crossover fashion to receive 2 weeks each of fluticasone 250 microg plus salmeterol 50 microg in combination (FP+SM), 1 puff b.i.d., and fluticasone 500 microg (FP), 1 puff b.i.d. Prior to each randomised treatment, there was a 2-week run-in and washout period during which patients used their usual inhaled corticosteroid therapy. Measurements were made before and after randomised treatment periods. The primary outcome was airway hyper-responsiveness to adenosine monophosphate (AMP PC(20)), while secondary endpoints were exhaled tidal nitric oxide (NO), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) and forced mid-expiratory flow (FEF(25-75)). RESULTS: For AMP PC(20), FP alone but not FP+SM conferred a significant ( P<0.05) improvement amounting to 3.27 (95% CI 1.46-7.32) and 1.44 (95% CI 0.64-3.23) geometric mean fold shifts, respectively, from baseline, while the difference between treatments was significantly ( P<0.05) greater with FP alone: a 2.26-fold (95% CI 1.01-5.07) difference. Both FP alone and FP+SM conferred significant ( P<0.05) falls in NO from baseline: 2.33 (95% CI 1.71-3.19) and 1.49 (95% CI 1.09-2.03) geometric mean fold changes, respectively, while between treatments the reduction was significantly ( P<0.05) greater with FP alone: a 1.57-fold (95% CI 1.15-2.14) difference. Neither treatment significantly improved FEV(1) or FEF(25-75). CONCLUSION: Double the dose of FP alone relative to FP+SM conferred superior effects on surrogate inflammatory markers but not on lung function. Long-term studies are required to evaluate whether these improvements on surrogate inflammatory markers translate into commensurate reductions in airway remodelling and exacerbations.

Adenosine Monophosphate↗

PubMed1999

Left-right comparison study of the combination of fluticasone propionate and UV-A vs. either fluticasone propionate or UV-A alone for the long-term treatment of vitiligo.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of using a combination of fluticasone propionate (FP) and UV-A with that of either drug used alone in the long-term treatment of vitiligo. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled, left-right comparison study. Repigmentation was judged by a single dermatologist (L.N.-K.) and skin thickness was scored by a pathologist (using biopsy samples), a dermatologist (L.N.-K.) (visually), and patients (using a standard questionnaire). SETTING: Netherlands Institute for Pigmentary Disorders, Amsterdam. PATIENTS: Patients with lesions on arms, legs, and trunk were treated on 2 symmetrical lesions for 9 months with FP alone and a combination of FP and UV-A (FP group) or with UV-A alone and a combination of FP and UV-A (UV-A group). Fluticasone propionate cream was applied once daily at about bedtime, and UV-A (10 J/cm2) exposure was twice a week. Patients attended the clinic at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-five patients were included, 96 of whom were evaluable after 9 months. Patients not reaching the end point withdrew because of insufficient repigmentation (n = 23), decreased motivation (n = 11), or protocol violations (n = 5). No patient (irrespective of whether they withdrew) experienced any adverse effects. The FP and UV-A groups were comparable with respect to sex, age, and location of lesions. On average, combination treatment was 3 times more effective than either UV-A or FP treatment alone. In the FP group, no atrophy was seen after 9 months with either treatment. In the UV-A group, a little atrophy was detected twice: as well during UV-A treatment alone as during combination treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Combination treatment with FP and UV-A is much more effective in reaching complete repigmentation than are FP and UV-A used alone, but large inter-individual differences occur. Fluticasone propionate, UV-A, and a combination of FP and UV-A seem to be safe for long-term treatment of vitiligo.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1995

High dose fluticasone propionate, 1 mg daily, versus fluticasone propionate, 2 mg daily, or budesonide, 1.6 mg daily, in patients with chronic severe asthma. International Study Group.

Airway inflammation is now regarded as fundamental in the pathogenesis of asthma and treatment with inhaled corticosteroids has proved effective. There is a need for drugs in this category with higher topical potency but fewer side-effects than those presently available. A double-blind, parallel group study was conducted in 671 patients with severe asthma (already taking between 0.8-2.0 mg of inhaled corticosteroid daily) to compare the safety and efficacy of 6 weeks of treatment with inhaled fluticasone propionate (FP), 1 mg daily, to fluticasone propionate, 2 mg daily, and budesonide (BUD), 1.6 mg daily, delivered via a metered-dose inhaler. Peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptoms, and usage of rescue medication were recorded daily by the patient. At each clinic visit (-2, 0, 3 and 6 weeks) morning serum cortisol levels, bone markers and spirometry were assessed. The changes in mean morning PEF from baseline (weeks 1-6) were: FP 2 mg daily +24 l.min-1; FP 1 mg daily +21 l.min-1; BUD 1.6 mg daily +13 l.min-1. A similar rank order for the three treatments was seen for evening PEF, clinic spirometry, reduction of diurnal PEF variation, symptom scores, and requirement for rescue bronchodilators. The mean serum cortisol levels remained well within the normal range in all three groups. Analysis of the geometric mean cortisol ratio (treatment/baseline ratio after 6 weeks treatment) showed a changed rank order, the values being: FP 1 mg daily 1.04; BUD 1.6 mg daily 0.97; FP 2 mg daily 0.88.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Aerosols↗

PubMed1999

The addition of salmeterol to fluticasone propionate versus increasing the dose of fluticasone propionate in patients with persistent asthma. Salmeterol Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Current treatment guidelines define inhaled corticosteroids such as fluticasone propionate (FP) as the cornerstone of anti-inflammatory therapy for asthma. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding salmeterol therapy to patients who remain symptomatic while receiving FP as compared with increasing the dose of FP. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind study conducted over 24-weeks, 437 patients aged 12 years and older and receiving FP 88 microg twice daily for 2 to 4 weeks were randomly assigned to receive either salmeterol (42 microg twice daily) or FP 220 microg twice daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was morning peak expiratory flow. Secondary measures included FEV1, symptom scores, nighttime awakenings, and supplemental albuterol use. Safety was assessed by reported adverse events and asthma exacerbations. RESULTS: The addition of salmeterol resulted in significantly greater improvements in lung function and symptom control as compared with increasing the dose of FP. Over weeks 1 to 24, morning peak expiratory flow was increased by 47 L/min from baseline with salmeterol treatment as compared with 24 L/min with FP 220 microg twice daily (P < .001) while the percent of symptom-free days increased from baseline by 26% of days as compared with 10% of days (P < .001). The adverse event profiles were similar between groups and fewer exacerbations were reported with salmeterol treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of salmeterol therapy to patients who remain symptomatic while using a low dose of FP was clinically and statistically superior to increasing the dose of FP.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2001

Addition of salmeterol to low-dose fluticasone versus higher-dose fluticasone: an analysis of asthma exacerbations.

BACKGROUND: Adding salmeterol to low-dose fluticasone propionate (FP) produces greater improvements in pulmonary function and symptom control than increasing the dose of FP in patients who remain symptomatic with low-dose FP. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the rates and characteristics of asthma exacerbations in patients after adding salmeterol to low-dose FP with the rates and characteristics of exacerbations in patients receiving higher dose FP. METHODS: In 2 multicenter, double-blind studies, 925 patients 12 years of age and older receiving 88 microg twice daily FP randomly received either 42 microg of salmeterol and 88 microg of FP or an increased dose of FP (220 microg) twice daily for 24 weeks. Exacerbation rates and clinical measures of asthma worsening were assessed for all patients who experienced an asthma exacerbation. RESULTS: The addition of salmeterol resulted in a significantly lower rate and number of exacerbations compared with higher dose FP. A total of 41 (8.8%) patients experienced 47 exacerbations with the addition of salmeterol compared with 63 (13.8%) patients with 75 exacerbations in the group receiving increased-dose FP (P =.017). Salmeterol plus low-dose FP was significantly more protective than increased-dose FP in preventing asthma exacerbations, as assessed by the time to first exacerbation (P <.05). In both groups clinical indicators of worsening asthma showed parallel changes before asthma exacerbation, and greater improvements were observed after exacerbation with salmeterol compared with higher dose FP. CONCLUSION: Salmeterol plus low-dose FP was more effective than higher dose FP alone in reducing asthma exacerbations in patients with persistent asthma. The ability to detect deteriorating asthma and the severity of exacerbation was similar between groups.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed2003

Steroid-sparing effects of fluticasone propionate 100 microg and salmeterol 50 microg administered twice daily in a single product in patients previously controlled with fluticasone propionate 250 microg administered twice daily.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent use of an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and an inhaled long-acting beta2-agonist provides better overall asthma control than the use of higher doses of ICS alone. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether fluticasone propionate (FP) combined with salmeterol in the Diskus device can be used to reduce the dose of ICS in patients currently stable on medium-dose ICS while maintaining asthma control. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 12- to 24-week trial consisting of a 3-part run-in period. The run-in period was designed to first establish FP 250 microg administered twice a day (bid) via Diskus as the minimum effective dose. During run-in period 1, patients received FP 220 microg bid or the equivalent for 10 to 14 days. Controlled patients moved to run-in period 2 (5-28 days), which assessed asthma stability on FP 100 microg bid administered via Diskus. Only patients who became unstable on FP 100 microg bid were eligible to enter run-in period 3 (26-30 days), during which they were placed on FP 250 microg bid and those regaining asthma control were eligible for randomization. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who remained in the study with no evidence of worsening asthma. Secondary efficacy measures included FEV1, morning peak expiratory flow, percent of symptom-free days, and daily albuterol use. RESULTS: Only 5% of patients treated with FP100/salmeterol withdrew because of worsening asthma in the first 12 weeks; this compared with 7% in the FP250 group. All patients from a subset of sites continued in the study for an additional 12 weeks; only an additional 1% of patients treated with either FP100/salmeterol or FP250 withdrew because of worsening asthma. Secondary efficacy measures confirmed primary efficacy results. CONCLUSION: In patients requiring FP250 bid for asthma stability, FP100/salmeterol bid was steroid-sparing, allowing a 60% reduction in the FP dose while maintaining overall asthma control.

Administration, Inhalation↗