Thorax

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Phillips, K
Right arrow Articles by Tattersfield, A E
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Phillips, K
Right arrow Articles by Tattersfield, A E
Thorax 2004;59:21-25
© 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & British Thoracic Society


ASTHMA

Use of sequential quadrupling dose regimens to study efficacy of inhaled corticosteroids in asthma

K Phillips, J Oborne, T W Harrison, A E Tattersfield

Division of Respiratory Medicine, University of Nottingham, City Hospital, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr K Phillips
Division of Respiratory Medicine, Clinical Sciences Building, City Hospital, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK; dr\|[lowbar]\|kate\|[lowbar]\|phillips{at}hotmail.com

Background: Inhaled corticosteroids are widely used to treat asthma. There is a need to be able to compare different inhaled corticosteroids and different doses of an inhaled corticosteroid to determine potency and dose equivalence, but measuring efficacy in a dose related manner is difficult because of their slow onset of action. There is uncertainty about the role of sequential dosing regimens and the best end point for such studies. We have explored the use of sequential quadrupling dose regimens and a range of end points to assess the response to budesonide in subjects with asthma.

Methods: 21 subjects with mild asthma, aged 18–65, took part in a randomised three way crossover study comparing two sequential and one non-sequential regimen, separated by at least 3 weeks. The sequential regimens consisted of increasing doses of inhaled budesonide (100, 400 1600 µg/day) with each dose being given for 1 or 2 weeks; the non-sequential regimen consisted of 1600 µg/day for 2 weeks with end points measured after 1 and 2 weeks. The end points studied included the provocative dose of adenosine monophosphate causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (PD20AMP), lung function, symptoms, and bronchodilator use.

Results: There was a dose related increase in PD20AMP with both sequential dose regimens. The increase in PD20AMP ranged from 1.49 doubling doses (DD) following the lowest dose (100 µg/day) to 3.1 DD following the highest dose (1600 µg/day) in the 1 week sequential regimen and from 1.98 to 4.03 DD in the 2 week sequential regimen; standard deviations (SD) for the changes in PD20AMP ranged from 1.3 to 2.6 DD. Changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and morning peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) were dose related but small and more variable (maximum change in FEV1 = 148 ml, SD 228 ml), while changes in evening PEFR, symptoms, and bronchodilator use were small and not dose related. Change in PD20AMP after budesonide 1600 µg did not differ significantly between regimens.

Conclusion: Combining PD20AMP measurements with a sequential regimen of three quadrupling doses of an inhaled corticosteroid given for 1 or 2 weeks provides clear dose-response curves for comparative studies. PD20AMP is a more sensitive end point for this purpose than FEV1, PEFR, symptoms, or relief inhaler use.


Keywords: asthma; inhaled corticosteroid; bronchial responsiveness




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ThoraxHome page
K Phillips, J Oborne, S Lewis, T W Harrison, and A E Tattersfield
Time course of action of two inhaled corticosteroids, fluticasone propionate and budesonide
Thorax, January 1, 2004; 59(1): 26 - 30.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2004 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & British Thoracic Society