Thermal Wave Measurements with a Mirage Detection for Investigation of Thermal Diffusivity of GdCa4O(BO3)3 Single Crystals

Single crystals of GdCa4O(BO3)3 were examined to determine their thermal properties. Samples were grown by the Czochralski pulling technique. There were three types of samples: a pure crystal, the crystal doped with neodymium (4 at.% of Nd), and the third one doped with ytterbium (7 at.% of Yb). All samples were rectangular prisms with edges parallel to the axes of the optical indicatrix X, Y , Z (principal axes). The thermal diffusivity was determined by means of the thermal wave method with the optical detection of the temperature disturbance based on a mirage effect. Experimental results showed anisotropy of the thermal diffusivity. The thermal diffusivity along Y direction has the highest value while values obtained in X and Z axes are much lower. Dopants cause decrease in the thermal diffusivity for all investigated directions

Fluticasone/formoterol combination therapy is as effective as fluticasone/salmeterol in the treatment of asthma, but has a more rapid onset of action: an open-label, randomized study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) fluticasone propionate (fluticasone) and the long-acting β₂-agonist (LABA) formoterol fumarate (formoterol) are being made available as a combination product (fluticasone/formoterol, <b><it>flutiform</it></b>^®) in a single aerosol inhaler. This 12-week, open-label, randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 3 study compared the efficacy and safety of fluticasone/formoterol with the commercially available combination product fluticasone/salmeterol.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients aged ≥ 18 years (N = 202) with mild-to-moderate–severe, persistent asthma for ≥ 6 months prior to screening were included in the study. After a screening phase (4–10 days), eligible patients were randomized 1:1 to receive fluticasone/formoterol or fluticasone/salmeterol during the 12-week treatment period. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of fluticasone/formoterol versus fluticasone/salmeterol, measured by pre-dose forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV₁), at week 12.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fluticasone/formoterol was comparable to fluticasone/salmeterol for the primary efficacy endpoint, mean pre-dose FEV₁at week 12. The new combination was also comparable to fluticasone/salmeterol for change from baseline to week 12 in pre-dose FEV₁, change from pre-dose FEV₁at baseline to 2-hour post-dose FEV₁at week 12 and discontinuations due to lack of efficacy. Importantly, fluticasone/formoterol was superior to fluticasone/salmeterol in time to onset of action throughout the duration of the study. The two treatments demonstrated similar results for various other secondary efficacy parameters, including other lung function tests, patient-reported outcomes, rescue medication use, asthma exacerbations and Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire scores. Fluticasone/formoterol was well tolerated and had a good safety profile that was similar to fluticasone/salmeterol.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results of this study indicate that fluticasone/formoterol is as effective as fluticasone/salmeterol, and has a more rapid onset of action, reflecting the faster bronchodilatory effects of formoterol compared with those of salmeterol. If patients perceive the benefits of therapy with fluticasone/formoterol more rapidly than with fluticasone/salmeterol, this could have a positive impact on preference and adherence.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00476073">NCT00476073</a></p