Suppr超能文献

CONCEPT试验:一项为期1年的多中心随机双盲双模拟试验,比较沙美特罗/丙酸氟替卡松稳定给药方案与福莫特罗/布地奈德可调整维持给药方案在持续性哮喘成人患者中的疗效。

The CONCEPT trial: a 1-year, multicenter, randomized,double-blind, double-dummy comparison of a stable dosing regimen of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate with an adjustable maintenance dosing regimen of formoterol/budesonide in adults with persistent asthma.

作者信息

FitzGerald J Mark, Boulet Louis-Philippe, Follows Richard M A

机构信息

Respiratory Division, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 2005 Apr;27(4):393-406. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2005.03.006.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

A patient-driven, adjustable maintenance dosing (AMD) approach to asthma therapy, in which the dose is adjusted by patients according to the severity of their symptoms, has recently been compared with fixed-dose therapy in open-label studies.

OBJECTIVE

This study used a double-blind, double-dummy design to compare the efficacy of 2 treatment approaches: stable dosing of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SAL/FP) and AMD of formoterol/budesonide (FOR/BUD).

METHODS

This was a 1-year, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy study in adult patients with symptomatic asthma that was not controlled by therapy with 200 to 500 microg/d inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) plus a long-acting beta2 agonist, or with >500 to 1000 microg/d ICS alone. Patients were randomized to receive 1 inhalation of SAL/FP 50/250 microg BID or 2 inhalations of FOR/BUD 6/200 microg BID, both delivered via dry powder inhaler devices. After 4 weeks of stable dosing in both groups, eligible patients continued the study for an additional 48 weeks, receiving either a stable dose of SAL/FP or AMD of FOR/BUD. According to the AMD treatment plan, patients initially halved their dose and subsequently stepped up or down as indicated by the presence or absence of nocturnal awakenings due to asthma, frequency of rescue medication use, and changes in morning peak expiratory flow (PEF). The primary end point was the percentage of symptom-free days. Other parameters included daily asthma symptom scores, morning PEF, percentage of days free of rescue medication use, daily rescue medication use, percentage of nighttime awakenings due to asthma, percentage of weeks with well-controlled asthma, and number of exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids or emergency department (ED) visits/hospitalizations. Tolerability was assessed in terms of adverse events spontaneously reported or elicited at clinic visits.

RESULTS

The intent-to-treat population comprised 688 patients (344 per treatment arm) with a mean age of 45 years and a mean baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 second 81% of the predicted normal value. After 4 weeks' stable dosing, 581 patients (295 SAL/FP, 286 FOR/BUD) continued beyond visit 3 into the remaining 48-week treatment period. Over weeks 1 through 52, patients receiving stable dosing of SAL/FP had a significantly greater percentage of symptom-free days compared with those receiving AMD of FOR/BUD (median, 58.8% vs 52.1%, respectively; P = 0.034). The incidence of asthma exacerbations requiring oral steroids or an ED visit/hospitalization was 47% lower with SAL/FP compared with FOR/BUD (adjusted annual mean rate, 0.18 vs 0.33; P = 0.008). During weeks 5 through 52, patients in the FOR/BUD AMD group used a mean of 1.8 inhalations/d (equivalent to BUD 360 microg/d), and 235 (82.2%) patients stepped down to 1 inhalation/d. Mean (SD) daily ICS exposure over 52 weeks was 463 (81) microg FP and 480 (238) microg BUD in the respective treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

In this adult population with persistent asthma, stable dosing of SAL/FP 50/250 microg BID resulted in significantly greater increases in symptom-free days, days free of rescue medication, and morning PEE, as well as almost halving the exacerbation rate, compared with AMD of FOR/BUD 6/200 microg. The results suggest that there is a minimum daily amount of maintenance therapy necessary to prevent exacerbations in adults with persistent asthma.

摘要

背景

一种由患者驱动的可调整维持剂量(AMD)的哮喘治疗方法,即患者根据症状严重程度调整剂量,最近在开放标签研究中与固定剂量疗法进行了比较。

目的

本研究采用双盲、双模拟设计,比较两种治疗方法的疗效:沙美特罗/丙酸氟替卡松(SAL/FP)稳定剂量治疗和福莫特罗/布地奈德(FOR/BUD)的AMD治疗。

方法

这是一项为期1年的多中心、随机、双盲、双模拟研究,对象为有症状的成年哮喘患者,这些患者使用200至500μg/天吸入性糖皮质激素(ICS)加长效β2激动剂治疗无法控制,或单独使用>500至1000μg/天ICS治疗无法控制。患者被随机分配接受每日2次吸入SAL/FP 50/250μg或每日2次吸入FOR/BUD 6/200μg,均通过干粉吸入器给药。两组稳定给药4周后,符合条件的患者继续研究48周,接受SAL/FP稳定剂量或FOR/BUD的AMD治疗。根据AMD治疗方案,患者最初将剂量减半,随后根据因哮喘导致的夜间觉醒情况、急救药物使用频率以及早晨呼气峰流速(PEF)的变化增加或减少剂量。主要终点是无症状天数的百分比。其他参数包括每日哮喘症状评分、早晨PEF、无需使用急救药物天数的百分比、每日急救药物使用情况、因哮喘导致的夜间觉醒百分比、哮喘控制良好周数的百分比以及需要口服糖皮质激素或急诊(ED)就诊/住院的加重发作次数。根据门诊自发报告或引发的不良事件评估耐受性。

结果

意向性治疗人群包括688例患者(每个治疗组344例),平均年龄45岁,1秒用力呼气量平均基线值为预测正常值的81%。稳定给药4周后,581例患者(295例SAL/FP,286例FOR/BUD)继续进入第3次就诊后的剩余48周治疗期。在第1至52周期间,接受SAL/FP稳定剂量治疗的患者无症状天数的百分比显著高于接受FOR/BUD的AMD治疗的患者(中位数分别为58.8%和52.1%;P = 0.034)。与FOR/BUD相比,SAL/FP治疗需要口服类固醇或急诊就诊/住院的哮喘加重发作发生率低47%(调整后的年平均发生率,0.18对0.33;P = 0.008)。在第5至52周期间,FOR/BUD的AMD组患者平均每天使用1.8次吸入(相当于布地奈德360μg/天),235例(82.2%)患者减至每天1次吸入。在各自治疗组中,52周内ICS的平均(标准差)每日暴露量分别为463(81)μg氟替卡松和480(238)μg布地奈德。

结论

在这群成年持续性哮喘患者中,与FOR/BUD 6/200μg的AMD治疗相比,SAL/FP 50/250μg每日2次稳定剂量治疗可显著增加无症状天数、无需使用急救药物天数和早晨PEF,且加重发作率几乎减半。结果表明,对于成年持续性哮喘患者,预防加重发作需要最低每日维持治疗量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验