Addition to inhaled corticosteroids of long-acting beta - agonists versus anti-leukotrienes for chronic asthma

Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (Impact Factor: 6.03). 01/2014; 1(1):CD003137. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003137.pub5
Source: PubMed


Asthma patients who continue to experience symptoms despite taking regular inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) represent a management challenge. Long-acting beta2-agonists (LABA) and anti-leukotrienes (LTRA) are two treatment options that could be considered as add-on therapy to ICS.
To compare the safety and efficacy of adding LABA versus LTRA to the treatment regimen for children and adults with asthma who remain symptomatic in spite of regular treatment with ICS. We specifically wished to examine the relative impact of the two agents on asthma exacerbations, lung function, symptoms, quality of life, adverse health events and withdrawals.
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register until December 2012. We consulted reference lists of all included studies and contacted pharmaceutical manufacturers to ask about other published or unpublished studies.
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in adults or children with recurrent asthma that was treated with ICS along with a fixed dose of a LABA or an LTRA for a minimum of four weeks.
Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias of included studies and extracted data. We sought unpublished data and further details of study design when necessary.
We included 18 RCTs (7208 participants), of which 16 recruited adults and adolescents (6872) and two recruited children six to 17 years of age (336) with asthma and significant reversibility to bronchodilator at baseline. Fourteen (79%) trials were of high methodological quality.The risk of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids (primary outcome of the review) was significantly lower with the combination of LABA + ICS compared with LTRA + ICS-from 13% to 11% (eight studies, 5923 adults and 334 children; risk ratio (RR) 0.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76 to 0.99; high-quality evidence). The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) with LABA compared with LTRA to prevent one additional exacerbation over four to 102 weeks was 62 (95% CI 34 to 794). The choice of LTRA, the dose of ICS and the participants' age group did not significantly influence the magnitude of effect. Although results were inconclusive, the effect appeared stronger in trials that used a single device rather than two devices to administer ICS and LABA and in trials of less than 12 weeks' duration.The addition of LABA to ICS was associated with a statistically greater improvement from baseline in lung function, as well as in symptoms, rescue medication use and quality of life, although the latter effects were modest. LTRA was superior in the prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm. More participants were satisfied with the combination of LABA + ICS than LTRA + ICS (three studies, 1625 adults; RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.20; moderate-quality evidence). The overall risk of withdrawal was significantly lower with LABA + ICS than with LTRA + ICS (13 studies, 6652 adults and 308 children; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.96; moderate-quality evidence). Although the risk of overall adverse events was equivalent between the two groups, the risk of serious adverse events (SAE) approached statistical significance in disfavour of LABA compared with LTRA (nine studies, 5658 adults and 630 children; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.79; P value 0.06; moderate-quality evidence), with no apparent impact of participants' age group.The following adverse events were reported, but no significant differences were demonstrated between groups: headache (11 studies, N = 6538); cardiovascular events (five studies, N = 5163), osteopenia and osteoporosis (two studies, N = 2963), adverse events (10 studies, N = 5977 adults and 300 children). A significant difference in the risk of oral moniliasis was noted, but this represents a low occurrence rate.
In adults with asthma that is inadequately controlled by predominantly low-dose ICS with significant bronchodilator reversibility, the addition of LABA to ICS is modestly superior to the addition of LTRA in reducing oral corticosteroid-treated exacerbations, with an absolute reduction of two percentage points. Differences favouring LABA over LTRA as adjunct therapy were observed in lung function and, to a lesser extend, in rescue medication use, symptoms and quality of life. The lower overall withdrawal rate and the higher proportion of participants satisfied with their therapy indirectly favour the combination of LABA + ICS over LTRA + ICS. Evidence showed a slightly increased risk of SAE with LABA compared with LTRA, with an absolute increase of one percentage point. Our findings modestly support the use of a single inhaler for the delivery of both LABA and low- or medium-dose ICS. Because of the paucity of paediatric trials, we are unable to draw firm conclusions about the best adjunct therapy in children.

Download full-text


Available from: Bhupendrasinh Chauhan, Jul 07, 2014
  • Source
    • "As a monotherapy, montelukast offers a rapid bronchodilator effect in asthma patients, regardless of their concurrent ICS treatment status[67]; however, when compared to ICS, the effect size of LTRA appears to be small in terms of exacerbation, lung function parameters, and symptoms[68]. As add-on therapy to ICS, LTRA appears to have a modest steroid-sparing effect among symptomatic patients[69]; however, LTRA was inferior to LABA as adjunctive therapy among adults who remained symptomatic in spite of regular ICS treatment, according to the meta-analyses of Cochrane Group[30]. However, as LTRA has oral formulation, it may have better adherence profile and appears to be similarly effective option in real-world practice settings, compared to inhaled steroids or LABA[70]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Asthma in the elderly is a disease with emerging concern. Despite some recent advances in our understanding of epidemiology and pathophysiology, there is a considerable lack of clinical evidence specific to elderly patients. Currently available high quality clinical evidence has been mostly obtained from younger adults, but rarely from elderly patients. Under-representation of elderly patients in previous randomized trials may have been due to being, old age, or having comorbidities. Thus, a question may be raised whether current clinical evidence could be well generalized into elderly patients. Further clinical trials should address clinical issues raised in elderly population. In this review, we aimed to overview the efficacy and safety of pharmacological management, and also to summarize the literature relevant to elderly asthma.
    Full-text · Article · Feb 2016
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The endogenous ligands for the leukotriene, lipoxin and oxoeicosanoid receptors are bioactive products produced by the action of the lipoxygenase family of enzymes. The leukotriene (LT) receptors are either activated by LTB4 (BLT1 and BLT2 ) or cysteinyl-LTs (CysLT1 and CysLT2 ), whereas oxoeicosanoids exert their action through the OXE receptor. In contrast to these pro-inflammatory mediators, the lipoxin (LX) A4 transduces responses associated with the resolution of inflammation through the receptor FPR2/ALX (ALX/FPR2). The aim of the present review is to give a state of the field on these receptors, with focus on recent important findings. For example, BLT1 receptor signaling in cancer and the dual role of the BLT2 receptor in pro- and anti-inflammation have added more complexity to lipid mediator signaling. Furthermore, a cross-talk between the CysLT and P2Y receptor systems has been described, and also the presence of novel receptors for cysteinyl-LTs, such as GPR17 and GPR99. Finally, lipoxygenase metabolites derived from omega-3 essential polyunsaturated referred to as resolvins activate the receptors GPR32 and ChemR23. In conclusion, the receptors for the lipoxygenase products make up a sophisticated and tightly controlled system of endogenous pro- and anti-inflammatory signaling in physiology and pathology.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2014 · British Journal of Pharmacology
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objective: To summarize the principal findings pertaining to most effective long term pharmacologic treatment of childhood asthma. Methods: Systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials (SRCTs) on pharmacologic chronic treatment in children (1 to 18 years) with persistent asthma were retrieved through MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, SCOPUS and CDSR (up to January2014). Results: One hundred eighty-three SRCTs were searched from databases. Among those, 39 SRCTs were included: 2 were related to step 1, 24 to step 2, 9 to step 3-4, and 4 to step 5 (according with NAEPP and GINA guidelines). The methodological quality of these SRCTs was determined using the AMSTAR tool. Results: For Step 1: Addition of ipatropium bromide to short-acting beta2-agonists does not show any benefit. For Step 2: In preschoolers, inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) reduce severe exacerbations and improve other clinical and lung function parameters. In children, ICS are superior to leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA), cromones, or xantines in reducing severe exacerbations, improving lung function and other clinical outcomes. Fluticasone propionate (FP) is better than beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) or budesonide only for lung function; but similar to hydrofluoroalkane-BDP or to ciclosenide. Compared to low ICSs doses, moderate doses result in only better lung function, but this is not true for FP. For step 3-4: Adding LTRA to ICS confers a small benefit; adding LABA improves lung function but does not reduce exacerbations more than double or higher ICSs doses. For step 5: Adding omalizumab decreases exacerbations. Conclusions: SRCTs are useful for guiding decisions in chronic childhood asthma treatment.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2014 · Journal of Asthma
Show more