Ringdal N, Chuchalin A, Chovan L, Tudoric N, Maggi E, Whitehead P J
Molde Indremedisinske Kontor, Norway.
Respir Med. 2002 Nov;96(11):851-61. doi: 10.1053/rmed.2002.1416.
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy safety and cost of Seretide (salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (Salm/FP), 50/250 microg bd) via Diskus with formoterol (Form; 12 microg bd) and budesonide (Bud; 800 microg bd) given concurrently (Form+Bud) via Turbuhaler in patients with moderate-to-severe asthma who were uncontrolled on existing corticosteroid therapy. The study used a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group design, consisting of a 2-week run-in period on current corticosteroid therapy (1000-1600 microg/day of BDP or equivalent) and a 12-week treatment period. Symptomatic patients (n = 428) with FEV1 of 50-85% predicted and increased symptom scores or reliever use during run-in were randomly allocated to receive either Salm/FP (50/250 microg bd) via a single Diskus inhaleror Form+Bud (12+800 microg bd) via separate Turbuhalers. Clinic, diary card and asthma-related health-care resource utilisation data were collected. Improvement in mean morning peak expiratory flow (PEFam was similar in the Salm/FP and Form+Bud groups. Both PEFam and mean evening PEF (PEFpm) increased by a clinically significant amount (>20 L/min) from baseline in both treatment groups. The mean rate of exacerbations (mild, moderate or severe) was significantly lower in the Salm/FP group (0.472) compared with the Form+Bud group (0.735) (ratio = 0.64; P < 0.001), despite the three-fold lower microgram inhaled corticosteroid dose in the Salm/FP group. Patients in the Salm/FP group also experienced significantly fewer nocturnal symptoms, with a higher median percentage of symptom-free nights (P = 0.04), nights with a symptom score <2 (P = 0.03), and nights with no awakenings (P = 0.02). Total asthma-related health-care costs were significantly lower in the Salm/FP group than the Form+Bud group (P<0.05). Both treatments were well tolerated, with a similar low incidence of adverse events. This study showed that in symptomatic patients with moderate-to-severe asthma, Salm/FP (50/250 microg bd), administered in a single convenient device (Diskus), was at least as effective as an approximately three-fold higher microgram corticosteroid dose of Bud (800 microg bd) given concurrently with Form (12 microg bd) in terms of improvement in PEFam, and superior at reducing exacerbations and nights with symptoms or night-time awakenings. Salm/FP was also the less costly treatment due primarily to lower hospitalisation and drug costs.
本研究旨在比较舒利迭(沙美特罗/丙酸氟替卡松(Salm/FP),50/250微克,每日两次)通过都保装置给药与福莫特罗(Form;12微克,每日两次)和布地奈德(Bud;800微克,每日两次)同时通过准纳器给药(Form+Bud)在接受现有皮质类固醇治疗但病情未得到控制的中重度哮喘患者中的疗效、安全性和成本。该研究采用随机、双盲、双模拟、平行组设计,包括在当前皮质类固醇治疗(每日1000 - 1600微克倍氯米松或等效药物)下为期2周的导入期和为期12周的治疗期。有症状的患者(n = 428),其预测第一秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)为50 - 85%,且在导入期症状评分增加或缓解药物使用增加,被随机分配接受通过单个都保吸入器吸入Salm/FP(50/250微克,每日两次)或通过单独的准纳器吸入Form+Bud(12 + 800微克,每日两次)。收集了临床、日记卡和哮喘相关医疗资源利用数据。Salm/FP组和Form+Bud组的平均晨起呼气峰值流速(PEFam)改善情况相似。两个治疗组的PEFam和平均夜间呼气峰值流速(PEFpm)均较基线有临床显著增加(>20升/分钟)。Salm/FP组的平均加重率(轻度、中度或重度)显著低于Form+Bud组(0.472对0.735)(比值 = 0.64;P < 0.001),尽管Salm/FP组吸入皮质类固醇剂量低三倍。Salm/FP组患者夜间症状也显著更少,无症状夜晚的中位数百分比更高(P = 0.04),症状评分<2的夜晚更多(P = 0.03),无觉醒的夜晚更多(P = 0.02)。Salm/FP组的哮喘相关总医疗成本显著低于Form+Bud组(P<0.05)。两种治疗耐受性均良好,不良事件发生率相似。本研究表明,在有症状的中重度哮喘患者中,通过单个便捷装置(都保)给药的Salm/FP(50/250微克,每日两次)在改善PEFam方面至少与同时给予约三倍剂量皮质类固醇的Bud(800微克,每日两次)联合Form(12微克,每日两次)效果相当,且在减少加重以及有症状或夜间觉醒的夜晚方面更优。Salm/FP也是成本较低的治疗方法,主要是因为住院和药物成本较低。