The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Montelukast and fluticasone compared with salmeterol and fluticasone in protecting against asthma exacerbation in adults: one year, double blind, randomised, comparative trial

Montelukast and fluticasone compared with salmeterol and fluticasone in protecting against asthma exacerbation in adults: one year, double blind, randomised, comparative trial
Montelukast and fluticasone compared with salmeterol and fluticasone in protecting against asthma exacerbation in adults: one year, double blind, randomised, comparative trial
Objectives: To assess the effect of montelukast versus salmeterol added to inhaled fluticasone propionate on asthma exacerbation in patients whose symptoms are inadequately controlled with fluticasone alone.
Design and setting: A 52 week, two period, double blind, multicentre trial during which patients whose symptoms remained uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids were randomised to add montelukast or salmeterol.
Participants: Patients (15-72 years; n = 1490) had a clinical history of chronic asthma for >= 1 year, a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) value 50-90% predicted, and a ? agonist improvement of >= 12% in FEV1.
Main outcome measures: The primary end point was the percentage of patients with at least one asthma exacerbation.
Results: 20.1% of the patients in the group receiving montelukast and fluticasone had an asthma exacerbation compared with 19.1% in the group receiving salmeterol and fluticasone; the difference was 1% (95% confidence interval -3.1% to 5.0%). With a risk ratio (montelukast-fluticasone/salmeterol-fluticasone) of 1.05 (0.86 to 1.29), treatment with montelukast and fluticasone was shown to be non-inferior to treatment with salmeterol and fluticasone. Salmeterol and fluticasone significantly increased FEV1 before a ? agonist was used and morning peak expiratory flow compared with montelukast and fluticasone (P <= 0.001), whereas FEV1 after a ? agonist was used and improvements in asthma specific quality of life and nocturnal awakenings were similar between the groups. Montelukast and fluticasone significantly (P = 0.011) reduced peripheral blood eosinophil counts compared with salmeterol and fluticasone. Both treatments were generally well tolerated.
Conclusion: The addition of montelukast in patients whose symptoms remain uncontrolled by inhaled fluticasone could provide equivalent clinical control to salmeterol.
0959-8138
891
Bjermer, Leif
b1880328-5814-4334-b922-4ed3332b7bae
Bisgaard, Hans
9c218eab-ee81-4fbf-97db-c0352a694491
Bousquet, Jean
8065d130-faa7-4c8e-bf40-8d2899980c21
Fabbri, Leonardo M.
0f4844a3-b97f-4c2d-9414-bd8d5bd383b7
Greening, Andrew P.
52073235-5aed-4f49-a6d8-afdab6f4e9d5
Haahtela, Tari
d83edd3e-f55d-41c2-93af-4d410ab935f7
Holgate, Stephen T.
2e7c17a9-6796-436e-8772-1fe6d2ac5edc
Picado, Cesar
dc28ddd6-75ea-45ad-a9ae-2a02c7eed26b
Menten, Joris
c9fb0837-be22-4da6-bd92-11e4710ebc59
Dass, S. Balachandra
b7378452-5036-46bb-b458-e1bca1793e0d
Leff, Jonathan A.
67ed72eb-b418-4d10-b832-103c5dcd18b0
Polos, Peter G.
1c15e75c-5fed-4fdf-970f-81a518ad6305
Bjermer, Leif
b1880328-5814-4334-b922-4ed3332b7bae
Bisgaard, Hans
9c218eab-ee81-4fbf-97db-c0352a694491
Bousquet, Jean
8065d130-faa7-4c8e-bf40-8d2899980c21
Fabbri, Leonardo M.
0f4844a3-b97f-4c2d-9414-bd8d5bd383b7
Greening, Andrew P.
52073235-5aed-4f49-a6d8-afdab6f4e9d5
Haahtela, Tari
d83edd3e-f55d-41c2-93af-4d410ab935f7
Holgate, Stephen T.
2e7c17a9-6796-436e-8772-1fe6d2ac5edc
Picado, Cesar
dc28ddd6-75ea-45ad-a9ae-2a02c7eed26b
Menten, Joris
c9fb0837-be22-4da6-bd92-11e4710ebc59
Dass, S. Balachandra
b7378452-5036-46bb-b458-e1bca1793e0d
Leff, Jonathan A.
67ed72eb-b418-4d10-b832-103c5dcd18b0
Polos, Peter G.
1c15e75c-5fed-4fdf-970f-81a518ad6305

Bjermer, Leif, Bisgaard, Hans, Bousquet, Jean, Fabbri, Leonardo M., Greening, Andrew P., Haahtela, Tari, Holgate, Stephen T., Picado, Cesar, Menten, Joris, Dass, S. Balachandra, Leff, Jonathan A. and Polos, Peter G. (2003) Montelukast and fluticasone compared with salmeterol and fluticasone in protecting against asthma exacerbation in adults: one year, double blind, randomised, comparative trial. BMJ, 327 (7420), 891. (doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7420.891).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the effect of montelukast versus salmeterol added to inhaled fluticasone propionate on asthma exacerbation in patients whose symptoms are inadequately controlled with fluticasone alone.
Design and setting: A 52 week, two period, double blind, multicentre trial during which patients whose symptoms remained uncontrolled by inhaled corticosteroids were randomised to add montelukast or salmeterol.
Participants: Patients (15-72 years; n = 1490) had a clinical history of chronic asthma for >= 1 year, a baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) value 50-90% predicted, and a ? agonist improvement of >= 12% in FEV1.
Main outcome measures: The primary end point was the percentage of patients with at least one asthma exacerbation.
Results: 20.1% of the patients in the group receiving montelukast and fluticasone had an asthma exacerbation compared with 19.1% in the group receiving salmeterol and fluticasone; the difference was 1% (95% confidence interval -3.1% to 5.0%). With a risk ratio (montelukast-fluticasone/salmeterol-fluticasone) of 1.05 (0.86 to 1.29), treatment with montelukast and fluticasone was shown to be non-inferior to treatment with salmeterol and fluticasone. Salmeterol and fluticasone significantly increased FEV1 before a ? agonist was used and morning peak expiratory flow compared with montelukast and fluticasone (P <= 0.001), whereas FEV1 after a ? agonist was used and improvements in asthma specific quality of life and nocturnal awakenings were similar between the groups. Montelukast and fluticasone significantly (P = 0.011) reduced peripheral blood eosinophil counts compared with salmeterol and fluticasone. Both treatments were generally well tolerated.
Conclusion: The addition of montelukast in patients whose symptoms remain uncontrolled by inhaled fluticasone could provide equivalent clinical control to salmeterol.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2003

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 26944
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/26944
ISSN: 0959-8138
PURE UUID: fa00d1fa-62ba-45e1-b53d-53cc81737fb1

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 25 Apr 2006
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 07:14

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Leif Bjermer
Author: Hans Bisgaard
Author: Jean Bousquet
Author: Leonardo M. Fabbri
Author: Andrew P. Greening
Author: Tari Haahtela
Author: Cesar Picado
Author: Joris Menten
Author: S. Balachandra Dass
Author: Jonathan A. Leff
Author: Peter G. Polos

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×