Comparison of the efficacy of formoterol and salmeterol in patients with reversible obstructive airway disease: a multicenter, randomized, open-label trial. Comparison of adjustable- and fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler and fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol dry powder inhaler in asthma patients. Eformoterol Turbohaler compared with salmeterol by dry powder inhaler in asthmatic children not controlled on inhaled corticosteroids.
Beta2-adrenergic agonists are frequently used for the prevention and relief of bronchospasm in patients with reversible obstructive airway disease. Formoterol and salmeterol are long-acting beta2-agonists. In addition to its long duration of action, formoterol has been reported to have an onset of action similar to that of albuterol.
                This study compared the effects on lung function of regular twice-daily inhalation of formoterol or salmeterol in adults with moderate to moderately severe persistent asthma who were receiving daily inhaled corticosteroids.
                In this 6-month, multicenter, open-label, parallel-group study, patients with moderate or moderately severe asthma were randomized to receive either formoterol 12 microg BID or salmeterol 50 microg BID. The primary end point was mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF) measured 5 minutes after dosing and entered in a patient diary each day during the first 4 weeks of treatment. Secondary end points included mean morning and evening predose PEF and number of episode-free days recorded in the patient diaries during the first 4 weeks of treatment, use and time of rescue medication, symptom scores, and overall mean morning predose PEF (spirometric measurements made by the physician during scheduled visits) for the entire treatment period. Safety assessments included spontaneously reported adverse events and vital signs.
                A total of 528 patients were randomized to study treatment, 262 to formoterol and 266 to salmeterol. There were no significant differences in demographic or baseline characteristics between treatment groups, except in the proportion of current smokers in the formoterol group (4.6%) compared with the salmeterol group (1.5%; P = 0.039). Based on the information recorded in patients' diaries, those receiving formoterol showed significant improvement in mean morning PEF measured 5 minutes after dosing (P < 0.001), reduced use of rescue medication (P < 0.03), and an increased number of episode-free days (P < 0.04) compared with patients receiving salmeterol. Mean predose morning and evening PEF and symptom scores based on diary data and mean morning predose PEF based on measurements obtained during office visits were comparable between the 2 treatment groups throughout the study.
                In this open-label trial, patients randomized to formoterol treatment had greater improvement in mean PEF 5 minutes after dosing, required significantly less rescue medication (fewer actuations of albuterol), and experienced more episode-free days compared with patients receiving salmeterol. Thus, although both formoterol and salmeterol are long-acting beta2-agonists, formoterol had a more rapid onset of action. The adjustable-dose budesonide/formoterol dry powder inhaler (DPI) has demonstrated similar or greater asthma control with less inhaled corticosteroid compared with the fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol DPI.
                We sought to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and resource use of maintenance therapy with the adjustable-dose budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler versus the fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol pressurized metered-dose inhaler and the fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol DPI.
                This was a randomized, open-label, multicenter study of patients (N = 1225) 12 years and older with moderate-to-severe persistent asthma. After 10 to 14 days of current therapy, patients were randomized 2:1 to fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol (160/4.5 microg x 2 inhalations [320/9 microg] twice daily) or fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (250/50 microg x 1 inhalation twice daily) for 1 month (treatment period 1), after which, the fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol group continued therapy and the fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol group was randomized 1:1 to fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol or adjustable-dose budesonide/formoterol (adjustable from 2 inhalations [320/9 microg] twice daily to 2 inhalations [320/9 microg] once daily or 4 inhalations [640/18 microg] twice daily) for 6 months (treatment period 2).
                There were no significant between-group differences in asthma exacerbations (primary variable), asthma symptoms, or lung function during the 7-month treatment period. Less study drug (inhalations per day, P < .001) was used with adjustable-dose versus fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol. All treatments were well tolerated.
                Adjustable-dose and fixed-dose budesonide/formoterol showed no differences in asthma control or tolerability versus fixed-dose fluticasone propionate/salmeterol. The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of the inhaled long-acting beta2-agonists eformoterol and salmeterol when added to existing inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy in symptomatic asthmatic children. This randomized, 12-week, parallel-group study, performed in a primary care setting, included 156 children and adolescents (aged 6-17 years) with moderate persistent asthma. Patients were randomized to open-label eformoterol (Oxis) Turbohaler 9 microg (delivered dose) or salmeterol Accuhaler 50 microg, both b.i.d, added to current ICS. Assessments included: changes in daytime reliever beta2-agonist therapy (primary variable), total 24-h reliever use, lung function, clinic and diary symptom scores, patient and carer health-related quality of life (HRQL) and adverse events. Daytime reliever use decreased significantly (p < 0.001) from baseline by 65% and 52%, respectively in the eformoterol and salmeterol treatment groups. Compared with salmeterol, eformoterol produced a greater decrease in daytime (-0.46 inhalations/day; p = 0.081) and 24-h (-0.70 inhalations/day; p = 0.043) reliever use. The percentage of patients who did not require any reliever medication during the study was significantly higher in the eformoterol group (p < 0.05 vs. salmeterol at weeks 8 and 12). Clinic and diary card peak expiratory flow and symptom measures all improved from baseline in both treatment arms. There was a significantly greater effect in favour of eformoterol for the reduction in clinic-assessed overall night-time symptoms (p < 0.05 vs. salmeterol). Clinically relevant improvements in patient-assessed HRQL occurred during treatment with eformoterol and salmeterol, but carer-assessed HRQL was improved to a clinically relevant extent, only with eformoterol. Both treatments were well tolerated. In children and adolescents with moderate persistent asthma, add-on therapy with eformoterol was well tolerated and at least as effective as salmeterol.
We identified four studies comparing regular formoterol to regular salmeterol (without randomised inhaled corticosteroids, but all participants were on regular background inhaled corticosteroids). The events were infrequent and consequently too few patients have been studied to allow any firm conclusions to be drawn about the relative safety of formoterol and salmeterol. Asthma-related serious adverse events were rare and there were no reported asthma-related deaths.