Søren Pedersen

University of Southern Denmark, Odense, South Denmark, Denmark

Are you Søren Pedersen?

Claim your profile

Publications (35)367.27 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The goal of asthma management is to achieve disease control; however, despite the availability of effective and safe medications, for many patients asthma remains uncontrolled. One reason for this is the fear of long-term side effects from the regular use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs). Adverse effects of poorly controlled asthma (for example, obesity, pneumonia, and risks to the fetus) can be perceived as side effects of ICSs. Poorly controlled asthma adversely affects children's cardiovascular fitness, while children with well-controlled asthma perform at the same level as their peers. Children with uncontrolled asthma also have a higher frequency of obesity than children with controlled asthma. Stress can affect asthma control, and children with poorly controlled asthma are more likely to have learning disabilities compared with those with good control. In adults, focused attention and concentration are negatively affected in patients with untreated asthma, and patients with asthma are at greater risk for depression. Also, poorly controlled asthma increases the risks of severe asthma exacerbations following upper respiratory and pneumococcal pulmonary infections. ICSs used to improve asthma control have been demonstrated to improve all of these outcomes. Lastly, the risks of uncontrolled asthma during pregnancy are substantially greater than the risks of recommended asthma medications. Treatments to maintain asthma control are the best approach to optimize maternal and fetal health in the pregnancies of women with asthma. The maintenance of asthma control has significant advantages to patients and greatly outweighs the potential risks of treatment side effects.
    Chest 02/2013; 143(2):511-23. DOI:10.1378/chest.12-0412 · 7.13 Impact Factor
  • Paul M O'Byrne, Søren Pedersen
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology 04/2012; 129(4):998-9. DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.02.030 · 11.25 Impact Factor
  • Søren Pedersen, Paul M O'Byrne
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology 03/2012; 129(5):1280-1. DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2012.02.048 · 11.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 1995, the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) published an evidence-based workshop report as a guide to clinicians managing asthma patients, and has updated it annually to ensure that recommendations remain current. Although the report has been widely disseminated and influenced clinical practice and research, its major objective, of forming the basis for local and national initiatives to improve services for asthma patients, remains to be achieved. Over recent years, the science of guideline implementation has progressed, and encouraging examples of successful asthma programmes have been published. This report is intended to draw on this experience and assist with the translation of asthma guideline recommendations into quality programmes for patients with asthma using current knowledge translation principles. It also provides examples of successful initiatives in various socioeconomic settings.
    European Respiratory Journal 01/2012; 39(5):1220-9. DOI:10.1183/09031936.00184511 · 7.13 Impact Factor
  • Thorax 01/2011; 66(1):87-88. DOI:10.1136/thx.2010.151167 · 8.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Asthma is the most common chronic disease of childhood and the leading cause of childhood morbidity from chronic disease as measured by school absences, emergency department visits, and hospitalisation. During the past two decades, many scientific advances have improved our understanding of asthma and our ability to manage and control it effectively. However, in children 5 years and younger, the clinical symptoms of asthma are variable and non-specific. Furthermore, neither airflow limitation nor airway inflammation, the main pathologic hallmarks of the condition, can be assessed routinely in this age group. For this reason, to aid in the diagnosis of asthma in young children, a symptoms-only descriptive approach that includes the definition of various wheezing phenotypes has been recommended. In 1993, the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) was implemented to develop a network of individuals, organizations, and public health officials to disseminate information about the care of patients with asthma while at the same time assuring a mechanism to incorporate the results of scientific investigations into asthma care. Since then, GINA has developed and regularly revised a Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention. Publications based on the Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention have been translated into many different languages to promote international collaboration and dissemination of information. In this report, Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention in Children 5 Years and Younger, an effort has been made to present the special challenges that must be taken into account in managing asthma in children during the first 5 years of life, including difficulties with diagnosis, the efficacy and safety of drugs and drug delivery systems, and the lack of data on new therapies. Approaches to these issues will vary among populations in the world based on socioeconomic conditions, genetic diversity, cultural beliefs, and differences in healthcare access and delivery. Patients in this age group are often managed by pediatricians and general practitioners routinely faced with a wide variety of issues related to childhood diseases.
    Pediatric Pulmonology 01/2011; 46(1):1-17. DOI:10.1002/ppul.21321 · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of three doses of ciclesonide (with or without spacer) in children with persistent asthma. This was a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week study of ciclesonide 40, 80 or 160 μg (once daily pm). Children (6-11 years) were randomised 1:1 to treatment via a metered dose inhaler (MDI) or MDI plus spacer. The primary variable was change from baseline in mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). Secondary variables included: time to first lack of efficacy (LOE), asthma control, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)), asthma symptom score and quality of life (QoL). Safety assessments included: adverse events (AEs), urinary cortisol excretion and body height. In total, 1073 children received treatment. At endpoint, mean morning PEF significantly improved with all doses of ciclesonide vs. placebo. There was no difference over placebo in time to first LOE, but ciclesonide was superior to placebo on asthma control, symptom score, FEV(1) and QoL. There were no differences between the spacer or non-spacer subgroups. The incidences of AEs were comparable between treatment groups (approximately 35%) and there were no between-group differences in body height or urinary cortisol. Ciclesonide 40-160 μg once daily is effective and well tolerated in children with persistent asthma; its efficacy and safety are unaffected by the use of a spacer. clinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT00384189.
    Respiratory medicine 11/2010; 104(11):1618-28. DOI:10.1016/j.rmed.2010.06.012 · 2.92 Impact Factor
  • Dirkje S Postma, Paul M O'Byrne, Søren Pedersen
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with mild persistent asthma constitute about 70% of the asthma population; thus, it is important to know which first-line treatment is best for the management of mild asthma. We compared benefits of first-line treatment with ciclesonide and a combination of fluticasone and salmeterol in patients with mild asthma. Patients aged 12 to 75 years with mild persistent asthma were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. After run-in, patients were randomized to ciclesonide 160 μg once daily (CIC160), fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 100/50 μg bid (FP200/S100), or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary variable was time to first severe asthma exacerbation; the coprimary variable was the percentage of poorly controlled asthma days. Patients recorded asthma symptoms and salbutamol use in electronic diaries and completed a standardized version of the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. Compared with placebo, the time to first severe asthma exacerbation was prolonged, and lung function was improved with FP200/S100 treatment (P = .0002) but not with CIC160. Both CIC160 and FP200/S100 provided significantly fewer poorly controlled asthma days than placebo (P ≤ .0016 for both active treatments). Moreover, both active treatments provided significantly more asthma symptom-free days (P ≤ .0001), rescue medication-free days (P = .0005, one-sided), and days with asthma control (P ≤ .0033). Overall Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores were significantly higher in both active treatment groups than placebo (P ≤ .0017). In mild asthma, FP200/S100 prolonged time to first severe asthma exacerbation, and CIC160 and FP200/S100 were clinically equieffective for most measures of asthma control. Trial registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00163358; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
    Chest 11/2010; 139(2):311-8. DOI:10.1378/chest.09-1735 · 7.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are the mainstay of asthma treatment. Studies in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease reported increased rates of pneumonia with ICS. Concerns exist about an increased pneumonia risk in patients with asthma taking ICS. To evaluate the risks of pneumonia in patients with asthma taking ICS. A retrospective analysis evaluated studies of the ICS budesonide in asthma. The primary data set were all double-blind, placebo-controlled trials lasting at least 3 months, involving budesonide (26 trials, n = 9,067 for budesonide; n = 5,926 for the comparator) sponsored by AstraZeneca. A secondary data set evaluated all double-blind trials lasting at least 3 months but without placebo control (60 trials, n = 33,496 for budesonide, n = 2,773 for fluticasone propionate). Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to estimate the relative effect of ICS on pneumonia adverse events (AEs) or serious adverse events (SAEs). In the primary data set, the occurrence of pneumonia AEs was 0.5% (rate 10.0 events/1,000 patient-years [TPY]) for budesonide and 1.2% (19.3 per TPY) for placebo (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.76; P < 0.001); the occurrence of pneumonia SAEs was 0.15% (2.9 per TPY) for budesonide and 0.13% (2.1 per TPY) for placebo (hazard ratio, 1.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-3.12; P = 0.58). In the secondary data set, the percentage of patients reporting pneumonia AEs was 0.70% (12.7 per TPY), whereas the percentage of patients reporting pneumonia SAEs was 0.17% (3.1 per TPY). There was no increased risk with higher budesonide doses or any difference between budesonide and fluticasone. There is no increased risk of pneumonia in patients with asthma, identified as an AE or SAE, in clinical trials using budesonide.
    American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 10/2010; 183(5):589-95. DOI:10.1164/rccm.201005-0694OC · 11.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of a combination inhaler containing budesonide and formoterol as both maintenance and quick relief therapy (SMART) has been recommended as an improved method of using inhaled corticosteroid/long-acting beta agonist (ICS/LABA) therapy. Published double-blind trials show that budesonide/formoterol therapy delivered in SMART fashion achieves better asthma outcomes than budesonide monotherapy or lower doses of budesonide/formoterol therapy delivered in constant dosage. Attempts to compare budesonide/formoterol SMART therapy with regular combination ICS/LABA dosing using other compounds have been confounded by a lack of blinding and unspecified dose adjustment strategies. The asthma control outcomes in SMART-treated patients are poor; it has been reported that only 17.1% of SMART-treated patients are controlled. In seven trials of 6-12 months duration, patients using SMART have used quick reliever daily (weighted average 0.92 inhalations/day), have awakened with asthma symptoms once every 7-10 days (weighted average 11.5% of nights), have suffered asthma symptoms more than half of days (weighted average 54.0% of days) and have had a severe exacerbation rate of one in five patients per year (weighted average 0.22 severe exacerbations/patient/year). These poor outcomes may reflect the recruitment of a skewed patient population. Although improvement from baseline has been attributed to these patients receiving additional ICS therapy at pivotal times, electronic monitoring has not been used to test this hypothesis nor the equally plausible hypothesis that patients who are non-compliant with maintenance medication have used budesonide/formoterol as needed for self-treatment of exacerbations. Although the long-term consequences of SMART therapy have not been studied, its use over 1 year has been associated with significant increases in sputum and biopsy eosinophilia. At present, there is no evidence that better asthma treatment outcomes can be obtained by moment-to-moment symptom-driven use of ICS/LABA therapy than conventional physician-monitored and adjusted ICS/LABA therapy.
    Thorax 08/2010; 65(8):747-52. DOI:10.1136/thx.2009.128504 · 8.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous studies have suggested a reduced benefit from therapy with inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in asthmatic patients who smoke. The objective of this post hoc study was to study the effects of low-dose inhaled budesonide on lung function in smokers and nonsmokers with mild persistent asthma. Adult patients (age, >or= 18 years) in the inhaled Steroid Treatment As Regular Therapy in early asthma (START) study, a 3-year, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, were stratified according to their smoking habits. The effects on lung function of therapy with budesonide vs placebo were compared in 492 asthmatic patients who smoked habitually and 2,432 nonsmokers. When treated with placebo, newly diagnosed asthmatic patients who smoke had a greater 3-year decline in post-bronchodilator therapy FEV(1), the change being -263.9 mL (SE, 21.8), when compared with nonsmokers on placebo, which was -180.8 mL (SE, 10.6), the mean difference being -83.1 mL (p < 0.001). Budesonide treatment was associated with a statistically significant 3-year increase in post-bronchodilator therapy FEV(1) in both groups. The effect of budesonide vs placebo was 71.5 mL (p = 0.011) in smokers and 46.5 mL (p = 0.001) in nonsmokers. The corresponding effect in pre-bronchodilator therapy FEV(1) was 118.1 mL (p = 0.002) in smokers and 72.9 mL (p < 0.001) in nonsmokers. Asthmatic patients who smoke, and are not treated with ICSs, have a greater decline in lung function than asthmatic patients who do not smoke. The benefits of therapy with inhaled budesonide on preventing lung function decline are similar in smokers and nonsmokers with mild persistent asthma.
    Chest 09/2009; 136(6):1514-20. DOI:10.1378/chest.09-1049 · 7.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ciclesonide is a new inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). Information about its clinical efficacy and safety in relation to other ICS in children is needed for clinical positioning. This 12-week, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, three-arm, parallel-group study compared the efficacy and safety of ciclesonide with fluticasone propionate in children with mainly moderate and severe persistent asthma. Seven hundred and forty-four patients (aged 6-11 years) were randomized to ciclesonide (80 or 160 microg once daily) or fluticasone propionate (88 microg twice daily), following a 2-4-week run-in. Efficacy measurements included forced expiratory flow in 1s (FEV(1)), morning peak expiratory flow (PEF), asthma symptom scores, rescue medication use and quality of life. Systemic effect was assessed by 24-hour urine free cortisol adjusted for creatinine. FEV(1) and morning PEF increased from baseline in all groups (p<0.0001). Ciclesonide 160 microg was not inferior to fluticasone propionate 176 microg for FEV(1) (p=0.0030, one-sided). In all groups, asthma symptom score sums and rescue medication use significantly improved (p<0.0001). The percentages of asthma symptom-, rescue medication- and nocturnal awakening-free days were high, with no significant differences between treatments. Quality of life scores improved with all treatments (p<0.0001). A significant dose-response occurred between low and higher doses of ciclesonide for exacerbations and asthma control definitions. The incidences of adverse events were comparable across treatments. Urine free cortisol levels decreased significantly with fluticasone propionate (p=0.0103), but not with ciclesonide. Once-daily ciclesonide has a clinical effect similar to that of fluticasone propionate, but does not suppress cortisol excretion, in children with moderate and severe asthma.
    Pulmonary Pharmacology &amp Therapeutics 12/2008; 22(3):214-20. DOI:10.1016/j.pupt.2008.12.013 · 2.57 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the association between asthma exacerbations and the decline in lung function, as well as the potential effects of an inhaled corticosteroid, budesonide, on exacerbation-related decline in patients with asthma. To determine whether severe asthma exacerbations are associated with a persistent decline in lung function. The START (inhaled steroid treatment as regular therapy in early asthma) study was a 3-year, randomized, double-blind study of 7,165 patients (5-66 yr) with persistent asthma for less than 2 years, to determine whether early intervention with low-dose inhaled budesonide prevents severe asthma-related events (exacerbations requiring hospitalization or emergency treatment) and decline in lung function. There were 315 patients who experienced at least one severe asthma exacerbation, of which 305 were analyzable, 190 in the placebo group and 115 in the budesonide group. In the placebo group, the change in post-bronchodilator FEV(1) % predicted from baseline to the end of the study, in patients who did or did not experience a severe exacerbation was -6.44% and -2.43%, respectively (P < 0.001). A significant difference was seen in both children and in adults, but not in adolescents. In the budesonide group, the change in the post-bronchodilator FEV(1) % predicted in patients who did or did not experience a severe exacerbation was -2.48% and -1.72%, respectively (P = 0.57). The difference in magnitude of reduction afforded by budesonide, in patients who experienced at least one severe asthma-related event compared with those who did not, was statistically significant (P = 0.042). Severe asthma exacerbations are associated with a more rapid decline in lung function. Treatment with low doses of inhaled corticosteroid is associated with an attenuation of the decline.
    American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 11/2008; 179(1):19-24. DOI:10.1164/rccm.200807-1126OC · 11.99 Impact Factor
  • Søren Pedersen, Paul M O'Byrne
    The Lancet 10/2008; 372(9643):1015-7. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61420-8 · 45.22 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The long-term solution to the asthma epidemic is thought to be prevention, and not treatment of established disease. Atopic asthma arises from gene-environment interactions, which mainly take place during a short period in prenatal and postnatal development. These interactions are not completely understood, and hence primary prevention remains an elusive goal. We argue that primary-care physicians, paediatricians, and specialists lack knowledge of the role of atopy in early life in the development of persistent asthma in children. In this review, we discuss how early identification of children at high risk is feasible on the basis of available technology and important for potential benefits to the children. Identification of an asthmatic child's atopic status in early life has practical clinical and prognostic implications, and sets the basis for future preventative strategies.
    The Lancet 10/2008; 372(9643):1100-6. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61451-8 · 45.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Inhaled Steroid Treatment as Regular Therapy in Early Asthma (START) study enrolled 7241 patients aged 5 to 66 years with recent-onset, mild persistent asthma to assess early intervention with the inhaled corticosteroid budesonide on long-term asthma control. The open-label phase of the START study was included to determine the effect on lung function and asthma control of adding budesonide to the reference group patients who had not initially received inhaled corticosteroids. Patients were randomized to double-blind treatment with budesonide, 200 mug (those aged < 11 years) or 400 mug once daily, or placebo plus the usual asthma therapy for 3 years, after which all patients received 2 years of open-label treatment with budesonide once daily. During the full 5-year study period, postbronchodilator FEV(1) percent predicted decreased, irrespective of randomized treatment during the double-blind phase, by an average of 2.22% (SE, 0.15%). However, patients with inhaled budesonide in the double-blind phase had a significantly lower risk (odds ratio, 0.61; P < .001) of a severe asthma-related event during the full 5-year study period than those in the reference group. Moreover, patients in the reference group used more additional asthma medications during both the open-label and double-blind phases. In mild persistent asthma early intervention with inhaled budesonide was associated with improved asthma control and less additional asthma medication use.
    The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology 06/2008; 121(5):1167-74. DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2008.02.029 · 11.25 Impact Factor
  • Soren E. Pedersen, Eric D. Bateman
    Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 03/2008; 121(3):780-780. DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2007.12.1143 · 11.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The relationship between eosinophilic airway inflammation and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB), and the response to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) therapy was examined. Twenty-six steroid-naïve asthmatic patients with EIB were randomized to two parallel, double-blind, crossover study arms (13 subjects in each arm). Each arm compared two dose levels of inhaled ciclesonide that were administered for 3 weeks with a washout period of 3 to 8 weeks, as follows: (1) 40 vs 160 microg daily; and (2) 80 vs 320 microg daily. Baseline and weekly assessments with exercise challenge and sputum analysis were performed. Data were pooled and demonstrated that 10 subjects had baseline sputum eosinophilia >or= 5%. Only high-dose ICS therapy (ie, 160 and 320 microg) significantly attenuated the sputum eosinophil percentage. Sputum eosinophil percentage significantly correlated with EIB severity, and predicted the magnitude and temporal response of EIB to high-dose therapy, but not to low-dose therapy (ie, 40 and 80 microg). Low-dose ICS therapy provided a significant reduction in EIB at 1 week, with little additional improvement thereafter, irrespective of baseline sputum eosinophil counts. In contrast, high-dose ICS therapy provided a significantly greater improvement in EIB in subjects with sputum eosinophilia compared to those with an eosinophil count of < 5%. The difference between the eosinophilic groups in the magnitude of improvement in EIB was evident after the first week of high-dose ICS therapy and increased with time. These results suggest that eosinophilic airway inflammation may be important in modifying the severity of EIB and the response to ICS therapy. Measurements of sputum eosinophil percentage may, therefore, be useful in predicting the magnitude and temporal response of EIB to different dose levels of ICSs. Trial registration: clinicaltrial.gov; Identifier: NCT00525772.
    Chest 03/2008; 133(2):404-11. DOI:10.1378/chest.07-2048 · 7.13 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Asthma is a serious health problem throughout the world. During the past two decades, many scientific advances have improved our understanding of asthma and ability to manage and control it effectively. However, recommendations for asthma care need to be adapted to local conditions, resources and services. Since it was formed in 1993, the Global Initiative for Asthma, a network of individuals, organisations and public health officials, has played a leading role in disseminating information about the care of patients with asthma based on a process of continuous review of published scientific investigations. A comprehensive workshop report entitled "A Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention", first published in 1995, has been widely adopted, translated and reproduced, and forms the basis for many national guidelines. The 2006 report contains important new themes. First, it asserts that "it is reasonable to expect that in most patients with asthma, control of the disease can and should be achieved and maintained," and recommends a change in approach to asthma management, with asthma control, rather than asthma severity, being the focus of treatment decisions. The importance of the patient-care giver partnership and guided self-management, along with setting goals for treatment, are also emphasised.
    European Respiratory Journal 02/2008; 31(1):143-78. DOI:10.1183/09031936.00138707 · 7.13 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Using a composite measure based on clinical outcomes, the GOAL study showed that achievement of Total Control of asthma was time dependent with the proportion of controlled patients continuing to rise through the year-long study. Taking data from this study, we compared time taken to achieve Total Control with time taken to achieve total control of each individual clinical criterion on treatment with salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SFC) or fluticasone propionate (FP) alone. Time to achieving total control of individual outcomes (day-time symptoms, night-time awakenings, rescue medication use, PEF > or =80% predicted every day) were analyzed by Kaplan Meier plots and compared with achievement of composite Total Control. Night-time awakenings responded most rapidly and daytime symptoms took longest to respond. After 12 weeks, the proportion of patients who achieved control of any individual clinical criterion was higher than the proportion who achieved control when using the composite outcome (no night-time awakenings achieved by 73% with SFC and 65% with FP; PEF > or =80% predicted every day, 55% and 45% respectively; no rescue usage 46% and 35% respectively; and no daytime symptoms, 35% and 24% respectively, compared with Total Control, 23% and 14% respectively). In every measure except night-time awakenings, more rapid responses were seen for SFC compared with FP alone. Speed of response of individual asthma measures varies and evaluation of control using any single measure overestimates total asthma control. Treatment should be continued until composite control is reached, rather than control of individual outcomes.
    Journal of Asthma 11/2007; 44(8):667-73. DOI:10.1080/02770900701554821 · 1.83 Impact Factor