Treatment of acute asthmatic exacerbations with an increased dose of inhaled steroid. Response profiles to fluticasone and montelukast in mild-to-moderate persistent childhood asthma. A randomized controlled trial of inhaled flunisolide in the management of acute asthma in children. A randomized open-label comparative study of montelukast versus theophylline added to inhaled corticosteroid in asthmatic children. Step-up therapy for children with uncontrolled asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids. Combined salmeterol/fluticasone propionate versus fluticasone propionate alone in mild asthma : a placebo-controlled comparison. Daily versus as-needed inhaled corticosteroid for mild persistent asthma (The Helsinki early intervention childhood asthma study). Peak flow monitoring for guided self-management in childhood asthma: a randomized controlled trial. An inhaled steroid improves markers of airway inflammation in patients with mild asthma. Nebulized budesonide versus oral steroid in severe exacerbations of childhood asthma. Treatment of acute, episodic asthma in preschool children using intermittent high dose inhaled steroids at home. Exercise training on disease control and quality of life in asthmatic children.
To investigate the efficacy of an increased dose of inhaled steroid used within the context of an asthma self management plan for treating exacerbations of asthma.
                Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, crossover trial.
                Twenty eight children aged 6-14 years with asthma of mild to moderate severity were studied for six months. Eighteen pairs of exacerbations were available for analysis, during which subjects took an increased dose of inhaled steroids or continued on the same dose.
                There was no significant difference between increasing inhaled steroids or placebo on morning or evening peak expiratory flow rates (PEFRs), diurnal peak flow variability, or symptom scores in the two weeks following an asthma exacerbation. Difference (95% confidence intervals) in baseline PEFR on days 1-3 were 3.4% (-3.5% to 10.4%) and -0.9% (-4.7% to 2.9%) for inhaled steroid and placebo, respectively. Spirometric function and the parents' opinion of the effectiveness of asthma medications at each exacerbation were also not significantly different between inhaled steroid or placebo.
                This study suggests that increasing the dose of inhaled steroids at the onset of an exacerbation of asthma is ineffective and should not be included in asthma self management plans. Outcome data are needed to base recommendations for controller asthma medication use in school-aged children.
                We sought to determine intraindividual and interindividual response profiles and predictors of response to an inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and a leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA).
                An ICS, fluticasone propionate (100 mug twice daily), and an LTRA, montelukast (5-10 mg nightly, age dependent), were administered to children ages 6 to 17 years with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma using only as-needed bronchodilators in a multicenter, double-masked, 2-sequence, 16-week crossover trial. Clinical, pulmonary, and inflammatory responses to these controllers were evaluated.
                Improvements in most clinical asthma control measures occurred with both controllers. However, clinical outcomes (asthma control days [ACDs], the validated Asthma Control Questionnaire, and albuterol use), pulmonary responses (FEV(1)/forced vital capacity, peak expiratory flow variability, morning peak expiratory flow, and measures of impedance), and inflammatory biomarkers (exhaled nitric oxide [eNO]) improved significantly more with fluticasone than with montelukast treatment. eNO was both a predictor of ACDs (P = .011) and a response indicator (P = .003) in discriminating the difference in ACD response between fluticasone and montelukast.
                The more favorable clinical, pulmonary, and inflammatory responses to an ICS than to an LTRA provide pediatric-based group evidence to support ICSs as the preferred first-line therapy for mild-to-moderate persistent asthma in children. eNO, as a predictor of response, might help to identify individual children not receiving controller medication who achieve a greater improvement in ACDs with an ICS compared with an LTRA. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may provide benefit in the therapy of acute asthma. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that ICS are as effective as oral corticosteroids (OCS) in the management of acute childhood asthma.
                A randomized, masked, placebo-controlled study was conducted in children aged 6 to 16 years seeking emergent care for an acute exacerbation of asthma. Patients were randomized into one of two groups: group 1 (OCS), oral prednisone, 2 mg/kg (maximum of 60 mg/d) for 7 days, and placebo pressurized metered-dose inhaler with valved holding chamber, four inhalations bid; and group 2 (ICS), flunisolide, four inhalations (1 mg) bid for 7 days, and daily placebo tablets. Spirometry (FEV(1)) was performed at baseline, day 3, and day 7 of the study. A symptom diary and twice-daily peak expiratory flow were recorded.
                A total of 58 subjects receiving ICS (n = 27) or OCS (n = 28) were enrolled. Baseline asthma severity, race, gender, and age were balanced between the two groups. chi(2) showed no significant difference in symptom severity between the two groups at any time during the study. FEV(1) percentage of predicted was lower in the ICS group on day 3 (65% vs 78%, p = 0.03) and on day 7 (77% vs 95%, p = 0.002).
                ICS were found to be useful in the management of acute asthma in children; however, spirometry data suggested a more rapid resolution of asthma with OCS. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are widely used in combination with other classes of drugs for treatment of childhood asthma. The efficacy and the safety of montelukast added to low-dose ICS therapy were compared with those of sustained-release theophylline added to low-dose ICS therapy in asthmatic children in the present study.
                Following the 2-week run-in period, 6-to 14-year old patients receiving treatment with ICSs were randomized to treatment for 4 weeks with either montelukast 5 mg once daily or sustained release theophylline 5-8 mg/kg (dry syrup) or 100-200 mg (tablet) twice daily. Patients also received a fixed dose of ICS throughout the run-in and treatment periods. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in peak expiratory flow (PEF) at Week 2.
                A significant increase in morning PEF was observed in the add-on montelukast group as compared with the add-on theophylline group at Week 2 (change from baseline of 22.8 L/minvs. 8.7 L/min; p = 0.041 for between-group difference) and at Week 4 (31.0 L/minvs. 9.8 L/min; p = 0.012). A significant increase in evening PEF was observed in the add-on montelukast group as compared with the add-on theophylline group at Week 4 (24.7 L/minvs. 8.7 L/min; p = 0.027). There were no significant differences between the treatment groups in incidences of clinical and laboratory adverse experiences.
                The results indicate that montelukast added to low-dose ICS is an effective and safe option for the treatment of asthma in children. For children who have uncontrolled asthma despite the use of low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), evidence to guide step-up therapy is lacking.
                We randomly assigned 182 children (6 to 17 years of age), who had uncontrolled asthma while receiving 100 microg of fluticasone twice daily, to receive each of three blinded step-up therapies in random order for 16 weeks: 250 microg of fluticasone twice daily (ICS step-up), 100 microg of fluticasone plus 50 microg of a long-acting beta-agonist twice daily (LABA step-up), or 100 microg of fluticasone twice daily plus 5 or 10 mg of a leukotriene-receptor antagonist daily (LTRA step-up). We used a triple-crossover design and a composite of three outcomes (exacerbations, asthma-control days, and the forced expiratory volume in 1 second) to determine whether the frequency of a differential response to the step-up regimens was more than 25%.
                A differential response occurred in 161 of 165 patients who were evaluated (P<0.001). The response to LABA step-up therapy was most likely to be the best response, as compared with responses to LTRA step-up (relative probability, 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 2.3; P=0.004) and ICS step-up (relative probability, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.4; P=0.002). Higher scores on the Asthma Control Test before randomization (indicating better control at baseline) predicted a better response to LABA step-up (P=0.009). White race predicted a better response to LABA step-up, whereas black patients were least likely to have a best response to LTRA step-up (P=0.005).
                Nearly all the children had a differential response to each step-up therapy. LABA step-up was significantly more likely to provide the best response than either ICS or LTRA step-up. However, many children had a best response to ICS or LTRA step-up therapy, highlighting the need to regularly monitor and appropriately adjust each child's asthma therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00395304.)
                2010 Massachusetts Medical Society Combined therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) and long-acting beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonists (LABAs) is the recommended approach for the treatment of patients with asthma that is uncontrolled on ICSs alone. Additional studies are needed to assess the safety and efficacy of combination treatment with ICSs and LABAs in patients with mild asthma. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily salmeterol/fluticasone propionate combination (SFC) with once-daily fluticasone propionate (FP) over a 12-week treatment period in patients with mild persistent asthma.
                This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study carried out in primary care or at a hospital outpatient department and included patients 12-79 years of age with mild persistent asthma (n = 458). After a 2-week run-in period, patients were randomized to receive SFC 50 microg/100 microg (n = 149), FP 100 microg (n = 154) or placebo (n = 155) once daily in the morning for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was patient-recorded pre-dose mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). Other assessments included asthma symptom scores, use of rescue medication and investigator-recorded exacerbations. Lung function was measured and assessed during clinic visits.
                For the primary efficacy endpoint of mean change in morning PEF, SFC achieved significantly greater increases from baseline than both placebo (difference in adjusted means 23 L/min; 95% CI 15.0, 30.3; p < 0.001) and FP (difference in adjusted means 14 L/min; 95% CI 6.3, 21.7; p < 0.001). Compared with those who received FP, patients in the SFC group demonstrated significantly greater improvements in mean evening PEF (95% CI 11.7, 28.1; p < 0.001), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (95% CI 0.093, 0.257; p < 0.001), forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of forced vital capacity (95% CI 0.242, 0.617; p < 0.001), the percentage of symptom-free days (95% CI 0.34, 0.87; p = 0.011), and the percentage of rescue medication-free days (95% CI 0.34, 0.90; p = 0.018). During weeks 5-12, 52% of patients in the SFC group achieved 'well controlled' asthma, compared with 42% and 26% of patients in the FP and placebo groups, respectively. Only one patient (receiving placebo) had a severe asthma exacerbation during the study; the frequency of adverse events was similar across the three treatment groups.
                Once-daily SFC 50 microg/100 microg provided significantly greater improvements in lung function and in asthma symptoms than once-daily FP 100 microg alone in patients with mild persistent asthma. However, twice-daily treatment with either SFC or ICSs plus short acting beta(2)-adrenoceptor agonists could be required to achieve guideline-defined asthma control in some patients. To compare the effect of inhaled budesonide given daily or as-needed on mild persistent childhood asthma. Patients, design and
                176 children aged 5-10 years with newly detected asthma were randomly assigned to three treatment groups: (1) continuous budesonide (400 microg twice daily for 1 month, 200 microg twice daily for months 2-6, 100 microg twice daily for months 7-18); (2) budesonide, identical treatment to group 1 during months 1-6, then budesonide for exacerbations as needed for months 7-18; and (3) disodium cromoglycate (DSCG) 10 mg three times daily for months 1-18. Exacerbations were treated with budesonide 400 microg twice daily for 2 weeks.
                Lung function, the number of exacerbations and growth.
                Compared with DSCG the initial regular budesonide treatment resulted in a significantly improved lung function, fewer exacerbations and a small but significant decline in growth velocity. After 18 months, however, the lung function improvements did not differ between the groups. During months 7-18, patients receiving continuous budesonide treatment had significantly fewer exacerbations (mean 0.97), compared with 1.69 in group 2 and 1.58 in group 3. The number of asthma-free days did not differ between regular and intermittent budesonide treatment. Growth velocity was normalised during continuous low-dose budesonide and budesonide therapy given as needed. The latter was associated with catch-up growth.
                Regular use of budesonide afforded better asthma control but had a more systemic effect than did use of budesonide as needed. The dose of ICS could be reduced as soon as asthma is controlled. Some children do not seem to need continuous ICS treatment. We asked whether the addition of PEF recordings to a symptom-based self-management plan improved outcome in school children with asthma. In an open-randomized, parallel-group, controlled trial, we studied children aged 7-14 years with moderate asthma. After a 4-week run-in, 90 children were randomized to receive either PEF plus symptom-based management or symptom-based management alone for 12 weeks. Thresholds for action based on PEF were 70% of best (for increasing inhaled steroids) and 50% of best (for commencing prednisolone). Children were asked to perform twice-daily spirometry at home (using an electronic recording spirometer that revealed only PEF to the study group alone) and to record a symptom diary. The mean daily symptom score was the main outcome. There were no differences between groups in mean symptom score or in spirometric lung function, PEF, quality of life score, or reported use of health services over 12 weeks. During acute episodes, children responded to changes in symptoms by increasing their inhaled steroids at a mean value of PEF of greater than 70% of best so that overall PEF did not contribute to this important self-management decision. Knowledge of PEF did not enhance self-management even during acute exacerbations. Airway inflammation can be demonstrated in mildly asthmatic patients who are not treated with inhaled steroids. Current guidelines recommend that inhaled steroids should be introduced in mild asthmatics who use an inhaled beta2-agonist more than once daily. It was postulated that inhaled steroids can have anti-inflammatory effects in patients with even milder disease. The effect of 4 weeks of treatment with budesonide (800 microg twice daily by Turbohaler) was studied in 10 steroid-naive mildly asthmatic patients (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) = 96+/-1.4% predicted) who required an inhaled beta2-agonist less than one puff daily, in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover fashion. Spirometry, exhaled nitric oxide (NO), bronchial responsiveness (provocative concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20)), and sputum induction were performed before and after each treatment period. Following budesonide treatment, there were significant improvements in FEV1, and PC20, in association with a significant reduction in the percentage of eosinophils in induced sputum. Exhaled NO levels tended towards reduction, but the change was nonsignificant. There were also nonsignificant reductions in sputum eosinophil cationic protein and tumour necrosis factor-alpha levels. In conclusion inhaled budesonide can lead to improvements in noninvasive markers of airway inflammation, in association with a small improvement in lung function, even in mildly asthmatic patients who require an inhaled beta2-agonist less than once daily. This suggests a potential benefit of inhaled corticosteroids, even in relatively asymptomatic asthma. The aim of this study was to assess whether nebulized budesonide may substitute for oral prednisolone in the management of children whose asthma is severe enough to warrant hospital admission, but who have no life threatening features. In a prospective, double-blind, randomized study nebulized budesonide (2 mg 8 hourly) was compared with oral prednisolone (2 mg/kg at entry and again at 24 h) in 46 children admitted to hospital with severe asthma exacerbations. Efficacy variables (including lung function measurements such as the primary outcome variable, Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1) and symptoms) were measured 24 h after treatment initiation. FEV1 improved significantly compared to baseline in patients who received nebulized budesonide compared to the prednislone group. The data show nebulized budesonide to be at least as effective as oral steroid in improving lung function and symptom severity in severe exacerbations of childhood asthma. In a double blind, controlled trial, the effect of high dose beclomethasone dipropionate (750 micrograms three times daily for five days) administered by metered dose inhaler and valved spacer, was compared with placebo, during 70 paired episodes of acute asthma in 24 preschool children. Treatment commenced at home at the first sign of an attack. Parents' blind preference for active treatment was significant. Data from 17 pairs of treatment, however, were affected by interventions such as hospital admission or oral corticosteroid treatment. These events occurred similarly in active and control periods. An intrasubject comparison was made of diary scores from the 18 pairs of episodes in which no intervention occurred in either the active or placebo treatment. Both daytime and night symptoms over the first week of the attack were significantly reduced by active treatment. Intermittent high dose inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate is beneficial in modifying the severity of acute episodic asthma in preschool children able to use a spacer device. Aerobic training has been shown to be effective in improving cardiopulmonary fitness in asthmatic children. However, the actual impact of physical training on clinical indicators of disease control remains controversial.
                Thirty-eight children with moderate to severe persistent asthma were randomly assigned to control (N=17) and training (N=21) groups. Spirometry, exercise challenge, and maximum incremental cardiopulmonary exercise tests were performed 16 wk apart. Daily doses of inhaled steroids and Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ) scores were also recorded.
                Physical training was associated with significant improvements in physiological variables at peak and submaximal exercise (P<0.05); in contrast, no significant changes were found in controls. Severity of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) and postexercise breathlessness were significantly lessened in trained patients; improvement in fitness and EIB, however, were not linearly related (P>0.05). In addition, PAQLQ scores improved only in trained children (P<0.01). Daily doses of inhaled steroids were reduced in trained patients (52%), but they remained unchanged or increased in controls (70.6%) (P=0.07).
                Supervised exercise training might be associated with beneficial effects on disease control and quality of life in asthmatic children. These data suggest an adjunct role of physical conditioning on clinical management of patients with more advanced disease.
In children with persistent asthma, the addition of LABA to ICS was not associated with a significant reduction in the rate of exacerbations requiring systemic steroids, but was superior for improving lung function compared to the same dose of ICS. Similarly, compared to a double dose ICS, the combination of LABA and ICS did not significantly increase the risk of exacerbations requiring oral steroids, but was associated with a significantly greater improvement in PEF and growth. The possibility of an increased risk of rescue oral steroids and hospital admission with LABA therapy needs to be further examined.