Effectiveness of fluticasone furoate/vilanterol versus fluticasone propionate/salmeterol on asthma control in the Salford Lung Study.
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Androstadienes
/ administration & dosage
Asthma
/ drug therapy
Benzyl Alcohols
/ administration & dosage
Bronchodilator Agents
/ administration & dosage
Chlorobenzenes
/ administration & dosage
Drug Administration Schedule
Drug Combinations
Female
Fluticasone-Salmeterol Drug Combination
/ administration & dosage
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Prospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
inhaled corticosteroid
long-acting beta-agonist
once-daily
randomised controlled trial
real-world
safety
Journal
The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma
ISSN: 1532-4303
Titre abrégé: J Asthma
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8106454
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2019
07 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
5
7
2018
medline:
7
5
2020
entrez:
5
7
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Asthma Salford Lung Study demonstrated the effectiveness of initiating once-daily fluticasone furoate/vilanterol (FF/VI) versus continuing usual care in asthma patients in UK primary care [ 1 ]. Here, we report a secondary analysis in a subset of patients with fluticasone propionate/salmeterol (FP/Salm) as their baseline intended maintenance therapy, to evaluate the relative effectiveness of initiating FF/VI versus continuing FP/Salm. Adults with symptomatic asthma were randomised to initiate FF/VI 100[200]/25 µg or continue FP/Salm. The Asthma Control Test (ACT), Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ), Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Asthma questionnaire, severe exacerbations, salbutamol inhaler prescriptions and serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded throughout the 12-month treatment period. One thousand two hundred and sixty-four patients (FF/VI 646; FP/Salm 618) were included in this subset analysis; 978 had baseline ACT score <20 and were included in the primary effectiveness analysis (PEA) population. At week 24, odds of patients being ACT responders (total score ≥20 and/or improvement from baseline ≥3) were significantly higher with FF/VI versus FP/Salm (71% vs. 56%; odds ratio 2.03 [95% CI: 1.53, 2.68]; p < 0.001 [PEA]). Significant benefit with FF/VI versus FP/Salm was also observed for AQLQ responders, activity impairment due to asthma, exacerbation rates, and salbutamol inhalers prescribed. No significant between-group differences were observed for impairment while working or work absenteeism due to asthma. For patients in primary care, initiating FF/VI was significantly better than continuing with FP/Salm for improving asthma control and quality of life, and reducing asthma exacerbations, with no notable difference in SAEs. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01706198.
Identifiants
pubmed: 29972089
doi: 10.1080/02770903.2018.1490751
doi:
Substances chimiques
Androstadienes
0
Benzyl Alcohols
0
Bronchodilator Agents
0
Chlorobenzenes
0
Drug Combinations
0
Fluticasone-Salmeterol Drug Combination
0
fluticasone furoate-vilanterol trifenatate
0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01706198']
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM