scholarly journals Formoterol Thrice Weekly Does Not Result in the Development of Tolerance to Bronchoprotection

2003 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth E Davis ◽  
John K Reid ◽  
Donald W Cockcroft
Keyword(s):  
Crossover Trial ◽  
Positive Control ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Weekly Administration ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Regular Treatment ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Direct Acting ◽  
Development Of Tolerance

BACKGROUND: Loss of bronchoprotection routinely follows regular treatment with beta2-agonists. There are no data on the effects on bronchoprotection for thrice weekly use of a beta2-agonist.METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled crossover trial was conducted to investigate the effects of thrice weekly administration of 12 μg of formoterol versus placebo on bronchoprotection against methacholine. As an expected positive control, formoterol 12 μg once daily was also evaluated.RESULTS: There was no significant difference versus placebo in the bronchoprotective effects of 12 μg of formoterol administered on day 8, following daily treatment for seven days or treatment every other day (analysis of variance P=0.34). However, a nonsignificant trend towards lower concentration of methacholine that caused a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s developed only following the daily formoterol dosing.CONCLUSIONS: Thrice weekly dosing does not result in the development of tolerance to bronchoprotection against the direct acting stimulus methacholine.

β 2-Adrenoceptor polymorphism and bronchoprotective sensitivity with regular short- and long-acting β2-agonist therapy

1999 ◽  
Vol 96 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. J. LIPWORTH ◽  
I. P. HALL ◽  
I. AZIZ ◽  
K. S. TAN ◽  
A. WHEATLEY
Keyword(s):  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Geometric Means ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Regular Treatment ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Long Acting ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Β2 Agonist

The aim of the present study was to investigate bronchoprotective sensitivity in patients receiving regular treatment with short- and long-acting β2-agonists and to evaluate any possible association with genetic polymorphism. Thirty-eight patients with stable mild to moderate asthma and receiving inhaled corticosteroids were randomized in a parallel group, double-blind, double-dummy fashion to receive 2 weeks of treatment with either formoterol (12μg once daily, 6μg twice daily or 24μg twice daily) or terbutaline (500μg four times daily). Bronchoprotection against methacholine challenge (as a provocative dose to produce a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1.0 ;s: PD20) was measured at baseline (unprotected) after an initial 1 week run-in without β2-agonist, and at 1 ;h after the first and last doses of each treatment. The PD20 values were log-transformed and calculated as change from baseline. Percentage desensitization of log PD20 for first- versus last-dose bronchoprotection was calculated and analysed according to effects of treatment and β2-adrenoceptor polymorphism at codon 16 or 27. The mean degree of desensitization for bronchoprotection was comparable with all four treatments and there were no significant differences in absolute PD20 values after 2 weeks of chronic dosing. The PD20 values were (as μg of methacholine, geometric means±S.E.M.): formoterol, 12μg once daily, 99±42μg; formoterol, 6μg twice daily, 107±44μg; formoterol, 24μg twice daily, 108±45μg; terbutaline, 500μg four times daily, 88±37μg. All patients receiving formoterol, 24μg twice daily, exhibited a loss of protection greater than 30% which was unrelated to polymorphism at codon 16 or 27. For codon 16, the use of lower doses of formoterol (12μg once daily or 6μg twice daily) showed wider variability in the propensity for protection loss in patients who were heterozygous, in contrast to a more uniform protection loss seen with homozygous glycine patients. The amount of protection loss was not significantly related to polymorphism at codon 16 or 27, expressed as values (mean±S.E.M.) for percentage desensitization according to each genotype (pooled treatments): Gly-16, 66±11%; Het-16, 53±8%; Arg-16, 69±18%; Glu-27, 68±12%; Het-27, 58±8%; Gln-27, 52±12%. The results of this preliminary study showed that bronchoprotective desensitization occurred readily in response to short- or long-acting β2-agonist exposure irrespective of β2-adrenoceptor polymorphism at codon 16 or 27. Further studies with larger patient numbers are required to further evaluate the effects of polymorphisms with lower doses of regular formoterol.

scholarly journals Single-inhaler fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) triple therapy versus tiotropium monotherapy in patients with COPD

2021 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandeep Bansal ◽  
Martin Anderson ◽  
Antonio Anzueto ◽  
Nicola Brown ◽  
Chris Compton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Status ◽  
Triple Therapy ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Fluticasone Furoate ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Copd Patients ◽  
Severe Copd

AbstractChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment guidelines do not currently include recommendations for escalation directly from monotherapy to triple therapy. This 12-week, double-blind, double-dummy study randomized 800 symptomatic moderate-to-very-severe COPD patients receiving tiotropium (TIO) for ≥3 months to once-daily fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) 100/62.5/25 mcg via ELLIPTA (n = 400) or TIO 18 mcg via HandiHaler (n = 400) plus matched placebo. Study endpoints included change from baseline in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Days 85 (primary), 28 and 84 (secondary), health status (St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ] and COPD Assessment Test [CAT]) and safety. FF/UMEC/VI significantly improved trough FEV1 at all timepoints (Day 85 treatment difference [95% CI] 95 mL [62–128]; P < 0.001), and significantly improved SGRQ and CAT versus TIO. Treatment safety profiles were similar. Once-daily single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI significantly improved lung function and health status versus once-daily TIO in symptomatic moderate-to-very-severe COPD patients, with a similar safety profile.

Sulphadiazine/Trimethoprim Once Daily in Maxillary Sinusitis: A Randomized Double-Blind Comparison with Sulphamethoxazole/Trimethoprim B.I.D.

1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 478-481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre Federspil ◽  
Peter Bamberg
Keyword(s):  
Maxillary Sinusitis ◽  
Favourable Result ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Days Of Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Blind Comparison ◽  
Cure Rates

In a randomized double-blind study fifty-four patients suffering from acute maxillary sinusitis were treated for 10 days with daily doses of sulphadiazine/trimethopim (1 g) and sulphamethoxazole/trimethoprim (1.92 g), respectively. The efficacy was evaluated clinically at two follow-up visits. X-ray investigations were performed at admission and after the therapy. Of thirty-nine patients finally evaluated, thirty-seven showed a favourable result. After 6–8 days of therapy there was significant difference in cure rates in favour of sulphadiazine/trimethoprim (p < 0.05) while the outcome as evaluated after treatment was similar for both drugs.

scholarly journals The Effect of 2 Injection Speeds on Local Anesthetic Discomfort During Inferior Alveolar Nerve Blocks

2015 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 106-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo Rodrigo de Souza Melo ◽  
Mark Jon Santana Sabey ◽  
Carla Juliane Lima ◽  
Liane Maciel de Almeida Souza ◽  
Francisco Carlos Groppo
Keyword(s):  
Pain Perception ◽  
Crossover Trial ◽  
Healthy Adult ◽  
Inferior Alveolar Nerve ◽  
Needle Insertion ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Adult Volunteers

Abstract This randomized double-blind crossover trial investigated the discomfort associated with 2 injection speeds, low (60 seconds) and slow (100 seconds), during inferior alveolar nerve block by using 1.8 mL of 2% lidocaine with 1 : 100,000 epinephrine. Three phases were considered: (a) mucosa perforation, (b) needle insertion, and (c) solution injection. Thirty-two healthy adult volunteers needing bilateral inferior alveolar nerve blocks at least 1 week apart were enrolled in the present study. The anesthetic procedure discomfort was recorded by volunteers on a 10-cm visual analog scale in each phase for both injection speeds. Comparison between the 2 anesthesia speeds in each phase was performed by paired t test. Results showed no statistically significant difference between injection speeds regarding perforation (P = .1016), needle placement (P = .0584), or speed injection (P = .1806). The discomfort in all phases was considered low. We concluded that the 2 injection speeds tested did not affect the volunteers' pain perception during inferior alveolar nerve blocks.

scholarly journals Effects of umeclidinium/vilanterol on exercise endurance in COPD: a randomised study

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 00073-2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Riley ◽  
Chris J. Kalberg ◽  
Alison Donald ◽  
David A. Lipson ◽  
Muhammad Shoaib ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Post Dose ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Endurance Time ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Randomised Study ◽  
Residual Capacity ◽  
Exercise Endurance

This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-period crossover study assessed the effect of umeclidinium/vilanterol (UMEC/VI) on exercise capacity in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using the endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT).Patients were randomised 1:1 to one of two treatment sequences: 1) UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg followed by placebo or 2) placebo followed by UMEC/VI 62.5/25 µg. Each treatment was taken once daily for 12 weeks. The primary end-point was 3-h post-dose exercise endurance time (EET) at week 12. Secondary end-points included trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and 3-h post-dose functional residual capacity (FRC), both at week 12. COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score at week 12 was also assessed.UMEC/VI treatment did not result in a statistically significant improvement in EET change from baseline at week 12 versus placebo (p=0.790). However, improvements were observed in trough FEV1 (206 mL, 95% CI 167–246), 3-h post-dose FRC (−346 mL, 95% CI −487 to −204) and CAT score (−1.07 units, 95% CI −2.09 to −0.05) versus placebo at week 12.UMEC/VI did not result in improvements in EET at week 12 versus placebo, despite improvements in measures of lung function, hyperinflation and health status.

scholarly journals Effects of the Toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) agonist, AZD8848, on allergen-induced responses in patients with mild asthma: a double-blind, randomised, parallel-group study

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian R. Leaker ◽  
Dave Singh ◽  
Sam Lindgren ◽  
Gun Almqvist ◽  
Leif Eriksson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune System ◽  
Allergic Asthma ◽  
Allergen Challenge ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Parallel Group Study ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Th2 Responses

Abstract Background Although allergic asthma is a complex area with many interacting factors involved, the ‘hygiene hypothesis’ proposes that a lack of exposure to infection during childhood may polarise the immune system towards allergen-reactive Th2-type responses in genetically susceptible individuals. Toll-like receptors (TLRs) play a key role within the innate immune system and TLR7 agonists have previously been shown to up-regulate Th1 responses and down-regulate Th2 responses to allergens in murine models of allergic or chronic asthma. This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of the novel TRL7 agonist AZD8848, which has been developed as an antedrug. Methods In this double-blind, randomised, parallel-group study, AZD8848 60 μg or placebo was administered intranasally once-weekly for 8 weeks in patients with mild-to-moderate allergic asthma (NCT00999466). Efficacy assessments were performed at 1 and 4 weeks after the last dose. The primary outcome was the late asthmatic response (LAR) fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) after allergen challenge at 1-week post-treatment. Results AZD8848 significantly reduced average LAR fall in FEV1 by 27% vs. placebo at 1 week after treatment (p = 0.035). This effect was sustained at 4 weeks post-treatment; however, it did not reach clinical significance. AZD8848 reduced post-allergen challenge methacholine-induced airway hyper-responsiveness (AHR) vs. placebo at 1 week post-dosing (treatment ratio: 2.20, p = 0.024), with no effect at 4 weeks. There was no significant difference between the two groups in plasma cytokine, sputum Th2 cytokine or eosinophil responses post-allergen challenge at 1 week after treatment. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. AZD8848 was generally well tolerated. Conclusions and clinical relevance In patients with allergic asthma, TLR7 agonists could potentially reduce allergen responsiveness by stimulating Type 1 interferon responses to down-regulate the dominant Th2 responses. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT00999466.

scholarly journals Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol monotherapies in symptomatic patients with COPD not receiving inhaled corticosteroids: the EMAX randomised trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
François Maltais ◽  
Leif Bjermer ◽  
Edward M. Kerwin ◽  
Paul W. Jones ◽  
Michael L. Watkins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Clinically Important Deterioration ◽  
Exacerbation Risk

Abstract Background Prospective evidence is lacking regarding incremental benefits of long-acting dual- versus mono-bronchodilation in improving symptoms and preventing short-term disease worsening/treatment failure in low exacerbation risk patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Methods The 24-week, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group Early MAXimisation of bronchodilation for improving COPD stability (EMAX) trial randomised patients at low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 μg once-daily, umeclidinium 62.5 μg once-daily or salmeterol 50 μg twice-daily. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at Week 24. The study was also powered for the secondary endpoint of Transition Dyspnoea Index at Week 24. Other efficacy assessments included spirometry, symptoms, heath status and short-term disease worsening measured by the composite endpoint of clinically important deterioration using three definitions. Results Change from baseline in trough FEV1 at Week 24 was 66 mL (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43, 89) and 141 mL (95% CI: 118, 164) greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus umeclidinium and salmeterol, respectively (both p < 0.001). Umeclidinium/vilanterol demonstrated consistent improvements in Transition Dyspnoea Index versus both monotherapies at Week 24 (vs umeclidinium: 0.37 [95% CI: 0.06, 0.68], p = 0.018; vs salmeterol: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.15, 0.76], p = 0.004) and all other symptom measures at all time points. Regardless of the clinically important deterioration definition considered, umeclidinium/vilanterol significantly reduced the risk of a first clinically important deterioration compared with umeclidinium (by 16–25% [p < 0.01]) and salmeterol (by 26–41% [p < 0.001]). Safety profiles were similar between treatments. Conclusions Umeclidinium/vilanterol consistently provides early and sustained improvements in lung function and symptoms and reduces the risk of deterioration/treatment failure versus umeclidinium or salmeterol in symptomatic patients with low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids. These findings suggest a potential for early use of dual bronchodilators to help optimise therapy in this patient group.

scholarly journals Tiotropium and olodaterol fixed-dose combinationversusmono-components in COPD (GOLD 2–4)

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 969-979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roland Buhl ◽  
François Maltais ◽  
Roger Abrahams ◽  
Leif Bjermer ◽  
Eric Derom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Multicentre Phase ◽  
St George's Respiratory Questionnaire

Efficacy and safety of tiotropium+olodaterol fixed-dose combination (FDC) compared with the mono-components was evaluated in patients with moderate to very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in two replicate, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase III trials.Patients received tiotropium+olodaterol FDC 2.5/5 μg or 5/5 μg, tiotropium 2.5 μg or 5 μg, or olodaterol 5 μg delivered once-dailyviaRespimat inhaler over 52 weeks. Primary end points were forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) area under the curve from 0 to 3 h (AUC0–3) response, trough FEV1 response and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at 24 weeks.In total, 5162 patients (2624 in Study 1237.5 and 2538 in Study 1237.6) received treatment. Both FDCs significantly improved FEV1 AUC0–3 and trough FEV1 responseversusthe mono-components in both studies. Statistically significant improvements in SGRQ total scoreversusthe mono-components were only seen for tiotropium+olodaterol FDC 5/5 μg. Incidence of adverse events was comparable between the FDCs and the mono-components.These studies demonstrated significant improvements in lung function and health-related quality of life with once-daily tiotropium+olodaterol FDCversusmono-components over 1 year in patients with moderate to very severe COPD.

scholarly journals Lung function, pharmacokinetics, and tolerability of inhaled indacaterol maleate and acetate in asthma patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Miller ◽  
Soniya Vaidya ◽  
Juergen Jauernig ◽  
Brian Ethell ◽  
Kristina Wagner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Function ◽  
Systemic Exposure ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Electronic Diary ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Long Acting ◽  
Salt Forms

Abstract Background Indacaterol maleate delivered with the Breezhaler® inhalation device is a long-acting β2-agonist approved for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In the development of a once daily, inhaled fixed dose combination (FDC) of indacaterol, glycopyrronium bromide (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist), and mometasone furoate (an inhaled corticosteroid [ICS]) for the treatment of patients with asthma, the acetate salt of indacaterol is used instead of the maleate salt. Here, we investigated the lung function, pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of indacaterol maleate 150 μg once daily (o.d.) and indacaterol acetate 150 μg o.d. in comparison with placebo. Methods This was a randomised, double-blind, three-period crossover study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03257995) in patients with asthma on background ICS therapy. Patients with percent predicted pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume per second (FEV1) ≥50% and ≤ 90% were included in the study. Patients received indacaterol maleate 150 μg o.d., indacaterol acetate 150 μg o.d., or placebo on top of stable background ICS in randomised sequence. Trough FEV1 was assessed after 14 days of treatment. PK of indacaterol salts were assessed at steady state after 14 days of treatment; peak expiratory flow (PEF) rate and rescue medication use were collected with a combined PEF-meter/electronic diary throughout the study. Results Of the 54 adult patients (median age of 48 years), 51 patients completed the study. Both indacaterol salts demonstrated statistically significant improvements in trough FEV1 of 186 mL (maleate) and 146 mL (acetate) compared with placebo (both P < 0.001). FEV1 AUC0-4h improved by 248 mL (maleate) and 245 mL (acetate), and PEF by 33 L/min (maleate) and 30.8 L/min (acetate) versus placebo. Systemic exposure of indacaterol (AUC0-24h,ss and Cmax,ss on Day 14) was comparable after administration of both salt forms. Both salt forms demonstrated a good safety profile and were well tolerated, with a difference in the reporting frequency of AEs of coughing (maleate, 23.5%; acetate, 0%). Conclusions In patients with asthma, indacaterol maleate and acetate elicited comparable and significant improvements in lung function compared with placebo and achieved comparable systemic exposure. Both indacaterol salts were safe and well tolerated. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03257995 June 06, 2017

scholarly journals Efficacy of a herbal toothpaste on patients with established gingivitis: a randomized controlled trial

2006 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 172-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabiana Ozaki ◽  
Claudio Mendes Pannuti ◽  
Ana Vitória Imbronito ◽  
Wellington Pessotti ◽  
Luciana Saraiva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Test Group ◽  
Experimental Period ◽  
Positive Control ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
And Control

The aim of this randomised, double blind controlled trial was to verify the efficacy of a herbal dentifrice on the reduction of plaque and gingivitis. Forty eight volunteers with established gingivitis were randomly assigned to either a test group (herbal dentifrice) or positive control group (dentifrice with triclosan and fluoride). The dentifrices were distributed in plain white tubes by an independent pharmacy, which revealed the contents of each tube only after the experimental period. Plaque and gingivitis assessments were carried out on baseline and after 28 days of product use. All examinations were conducted by the same calibrated investigator. Subjects were instructed to brush their teeth three times daily using their assigned dentifrice for 28 days. There was a significant reduction in plaque levels in both the test and control groups. However, there was no significant difference between the groups. A significant reduction in gingivitis was observed in both groups, although there was no significant difference between them. No adverse reactions were reported. The authors concluded that both dentifrices were effective in reducing plaque and gingivitis in subjects with established gingivitis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document