Clinical trial of low-dose theophylline and montelukast in patients with poorly controlled asthma

被引:99
作者
Irvin, Charles G. [1 ]
Kaminsky, David A. [1 ]
Anthonisen, Nicholas R. [1 ]
Castro, Mario [1 ]
Hanania, Nicola A. [1 ]
Holbrook, Janet T. [1 ]
Lima, John J. [1 ]
Wise, Robert A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Asthma & Allergy Ctr, Baltimore, MD 21224 USA
关键词
antiasthmatic agents; bronchodilator agents; clinical trial; multicenter studies;
D O I
10.1164/rccm.200603-416OC
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 [临床医学]; 100602 [中西医结合临床];
摘要
Background: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend addition of controller medications for patients with poorly controlled asthma. We compared the effectiveness of once-daily oral controller therapy with either an antileukotriene receptor antagonist (montelukast) or low-dose theophylline added to existing medications in patients with poorly controlled asthma. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial in 489 participants with poorly controlled asthma randomly assigned to placebo, theophylline (300 mg/d), or montelukast (110 mg/d). Participants were monitored for 24 wk to measure the rate of episodes of poor asthma control (EPACs) defined by decreased peak flow, increased P-agonist use, increased oral corticosteroid use, or unscheduled health care visits. Observations: There was no significant difference in EPAC rates (events/person/yr) Compared with placebo: low-dose theophylline, 4.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-6.7; not significant); montelukast, 4.0 (95% CI, 3.0-5.4; not significant); and placebo, 4.9 (95% CI, 3.8-6.4). Both montelukast and theophylline caused small improvements in prebronchodilator FEV1 of borderline significance. Nausea was more common with theophylline only during the first 4 wk of treatment. Neither treatment improved asthma symptoms or quality of life. However, in patients not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, addition of low-dose theophylline significantly (p < 0.002) improved asthma control and symptoms as well as lung function. Conclusions: Neither montelukast nor low-dose theophylline lowered the EPAC rate of poor asthma control in patients with poorly controlled asthma despite improved lung function. For patients not using inhaled corticosteroids, low-dose theophylline improved asthma symptom control more than montelukast or placebo, and provides a safe and low-cost alternative asthma treatment.
引用
收藏
页码:235 / 242
页数:8
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]
DETERMINATION OF MK-0476 IN HUMAN PLASMA BY LIQUID-CHROMATOGRAPHY [J].
AMIN, RD ;
CHENG, HY ;
ROGERS, JD .
JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOMEDICAL ANALYSIS, 1995, 13 (02) :155-158
[2]
[Anonymous], 2003, HYPERTENSION, DOI DOI 10.1161/01.HYP.0000107251.49515.C2
[4]
Can guideline-defined asthma control be achieved? The gaining optimal asthma control study [J].
Bateman, ED ;
Boushey, HA ;
Bousquet, J ;
Busse, WW ;
Clark, TJH ;
Pauwels, RA ;
Pedersen, SE .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2004, 170 (08) :836-844
[5]
Montelukast and fluticasone compared with salmeterol and fluticasone in protecting against asthma exacerbation in adults: one year, double blind, randomised, comparative trial [J].
Bjermer, L ;
Bisgaard, H ;
Bousquet, J ;
Fabbri, LM ;
Greening, AP ;
Haahtela, T ;
Holgate, ST ;
Picado, C ;
Menten, J ;
Dass, SB ;
Leff, JA ;
Polos, PG .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2003, 327 (7420) :891-895
[6]
Castro M, 2001, NEW ENGL J MED, V345, P1529, DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa011961
[7]
THEOPHYLLINE THERAPY INHIBITS NEUTROPHIL AND MONONUCLEAR CELL CHEMOTAXIS FROM CHRONIC ASTHMATIC-CHILDREN [J].
CONDINONETO, A ;
VILELA, MMS ;
CAMBIUCCI, EC ;
RIBEIRO, JD ;
GUGLIELMI, AAG ;
MAGNA, LA ;
DENUCCI, G .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 1991, 32 (05) :557-561
[8]
Effects of adding either a leukotriene receptor antagonist or low-dose theophylline to a low or medium dose of inhaled corticosteroid in patients with persistent asthma [J].
Dempsey, OJ ;
Fowler, SJ ;
Wilson, A ;
Kennedy, G ;
Lipworth, BJ .
CHEST, 2002, 122 (01) :151-159
[9]
DUCHARME FM, 2003, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V136, P621
[10]
DUCHARME FM, 2002, BMJ-BRIT MED J, V329, P1545