Anderson P B, Langley S J, Mooney P, Jones J, Addlestone R, Rossetti A, Cantini L
Chest Clinic, Northern General NHS Trust, Sheffield, UK.
J Investig Allergol Clin Immunol. 2002;12(2):107-13.
The present study demonstrates the equivalent efficacy for BDP 500 microg bid given via MDI with the new HFA-134a propellant (Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A., Parma) compared to a conventional CFC propellant (Becotide, Allen & Hanburys, UK). One hundred and sixteen adult patients with stable mild to moderate asthma (FEV1 > or = 60% of predicted normal) entered a 2-week run-in period where they maintained their own inhaled corticosteroids and were then assigned to a 12-week treatment with the test drug in a randomized, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group design. Ninety-one patients completed the study period. Morning and evening peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), use of rescue salbutamol, number of daytime and nighttime asthma attacks, number of nighttime awakenings, and clinical symptoms were recorded daily by patients on a diary card. Pulmonary function tests (FEV1, FVC, PEFR, MEF50 and FEF25) were completed at study entry, at the start of treatment and every 2 weeks thereafter. Morning (08.00-10.00 AM) serum cortisol was measured at the start and at the end of treatment. Adverse events were collected for the total study period. Equivalence between groups was demonstrated for the primary end-point morning PEFR, as well as for evening PEFR and FEV1 (the 95% CI of the treatments' difference was within the 5% of the LSM of BDP CFC). The other secondary pulmonary function tests measured at the clinic visit showed a satisfactory asthma control, albeit without statistically significant differences between groups. Decreases in the use of rescue salbutamol and in clinical symptoms were also reported in both groups, with no differences between them. Adverse events were reported in 81.4% of patients in the BDP HFA group and in 82.5% in the CFC group. There were 73 and 59 adverse drug reactions in the two groups, respectively; the difference was mainly due to differences in taste. No drug-related serious adverse events were reported in either group. No difference was seen for morning serum cortisol between baseline and end of treatment, or between groups. In conclusion, the BDP-HFA 134a formulation proved to be statistically equivalent to the standard BDP CFC product over 12 weeks in adult patients with mild to moderate asthma.
本研究表明,与传统的氯氟烃(CFC)推进剂(英国艾伦汉伯里公司的必可酮)相比,使用新型氢氟烷烃-134a(HFA-134a)推进剂的MDI吸入布地奈德500μg,每日两次,具有同等疗效。116例稳定期轻度至中度哮喘成年患者(FEV1≥预测正常值的60%)进入为期2周的导入期,在此期间维持他们原有的吸入性糖皮质激素治疗,然后采用随机、多中心、双盲、双模拟、平行组设计,接受试验药物治疗12周。91例患者完成了研究期。患者每天在日记卡上记录早晚呼气峰值流速(PEFR)、急救沙丁胺醇的使用情况、白天和夜间哮喘发作次数、夜间觉醒次数以及临床症状。在研究开始时、治疗开始时以及此后每2周进行一次肺功能测试(FEV1、FVC、PEFR、MEF50和FEF25)。在治疗开始和结束时测量早晨(上午8:00 - 10:00)血清皮质醇。收集整个研究期间的不良事件。两组在主要终点早晨PEFR以及晚上PEFR和FEV1方面显示出等效性(治疗差异的95%置信区间在布地奈德CFC组最小二乘均值的5%以内)。在门诊测量的其他次要肺功能测试显示哮喘控制情况良好,尽管两组之间无统计学显著差异。两组均报告急救沙丁胺醇使用量和临床症状有所减少,且两组之间无差异。BDP HFA组81.4%的患者和CFC组82.5%的患者报告了不良事件。两组分别有73例和59例药物不良反应;差异主要是由于味道不同。两组均未报告与药物相关的严重不良事件。治疗基线与结束时之间或两组之间,早晨血清皮质醇未见差异。总之,在轻度至中度哮喘成年患者中,BDP-HFA 134a制剂在12周内被证明在统计学上等同于标准的BDP CFC产品。