Efficacy in asthma of once-daily treatment with fluticasone furoate: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Fluticasone furoate (FF) is a novel long-acting inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). This double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized study evaluated the efficacy and safety of FF 200 mcg or 400 mcg once daily, either in the morning or in the evening, and FF 200 mcg twice daily (morning and evening), for 8 weeks in patients with persistent asthma.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Asthma patients maintained on ICS for ≥ 3 months with baseline morning forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) 50-80% of predicted normal value and FEV₁reversibility of ≥ 12% and ≥ 200 ml were eligible. The primary endpoint was mean change from baseline FEV₁at week 8 in pre-dose (morning or evening [depending on regimen], pre-rescue bronchodilator) FEV₁.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 545 patients received one of five FF treatment groups and 101 patients received placebo (intent-to-treat population). Each of the five FF treatment groups produced a statistically significant improvement in pre-dose FEV₁compared with placebo (p < 0.05). FF 400 mcg once daily in the evening and FF 200 mcg twice daily produced similar placebo-adjusted improvements in evening pre-dose FEV₁at week 8 (240 ml vs. 235 ml). FF 400 mcg once daily in the morning, although effective, resulted in a smaller improvement in morning pre-dose FEV₁than FF 200 mcg twice daily at week 8 (315 ml vs. 202 ml). The incidence of oral candidiasis was low (0-4%) and UC excretion was comparable with placebo for all FF groups.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>FF at total daily doses of 200 mcg or 400 mcg was significantly more effective than placebo. FF 400 mcg once daily in the evening had similar efficacy to FF 200 mcg twice daily and all FF regimens had a safety tolerability profile generally similar to placebo. This indicates that inhaled FF is an effective and well tolerated once-daily treatment for mild-to-moderate asthma.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00398645">NCT00398645</a></p

Design, analysis, and presentation of crossover trials

OBJECTIVE: Although crossover trials enjoy wide use, standards for analysis and reporting have not been established. We reviewed methodological aspects and quality of reporting in a representative sample of published crossover trials. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE for December 2000 and identified all randomized crossover trials. We abstracted data independently, in duplicate, on 14 design criteria, 13 analysis criteria, and 14 criteria assessing the data presentation. RESULTS: We identified 526 randomized controlled trials, of which 116 were crossover trials. Trials were drug efficacy (48%), pharmacokinetic (28%), and nonpharmacologic (30%). The median sample size was 15 (interquartile range 8-38). Most (72%) trials used 2 treatments and had 2 periods (64%). Few trials reported allocation concealment (17%) or sequence generation (7%). Only 20% of trials reported a sample size calculation and only 31% of these considered pairing of data in the calculation. Carry-over issues were addressed in 29% of trial's methods. Most trials reported and defended a washout period (70%). Almost all trials (93%) tested for treatment effects using paired data and also presented details on by-group results (95%). Only 29% presented CIs or SE so that data could be entered into a meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: Reports of crossover trials frequently omit important methodological issues in design, analysis, and presentation. Guidelines for the conduct and reporting of crossover trials might improve the conduct and reporting of studies using this important trial design

A Review of the Rationale for Additional Therapeutic Interventions to Attain Lower LDL-C When Statin Therapy Is Not Enough

Statins alone are not always adequate therapy to achieve low-density lipoprotein (LDL) goals in many patients. Many options are available either alone or in combination with statins that makes it possible to reach recommended goals in a safe and tolerable fashion for most patients. Ezetimibe and bile acid sequestrants reduce cholesterol transport to the liver and can be used in combination. Niacin is very effective at lowering LDL, beyond its ability to raise high-density lipoprotein and shift LDL particle size to a less atherogenic type. When statins cannot be tolerated at all, red yeast rice can be used if proper formulations of the product are obtained. Nutrients can also be added to the diet, including plant stanols and sterols, soy protein, almonds, and fiber, either individually or all together as a portfolio diet. A clear understanding of how each of these strategies works is essential for effective results

New Options in the Treatment of Lipid Disorders in HIV-Infected Patients

Since the introduction of HAART, there was a remarkably change in the natural history of HIV disease, leading to a notable extension of life expectancy, although prolonged metabolic imbalances could significantly act on the longterm prognosis and outcome of HIV-infected persons, and there is an increasing concern about the cardiovascular risk in this population. Current recommendations suggest that HIV-infected perons undergo evaluation and treatment on the basis of the Third National Cholesterol Education Program Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (NCEP ATP III) guidelines for dyslipidemia, with particular attention to potential drug interactions with antiretroviral agents and maintenance of virologic control of HIV infection. While a hypolipidemic diet and physical activity may certainly improve dyslipidemia, pharmacological treatment becomes indispensable when serum lipid are excessively high for a long time or the patient has a high cardiovascular risk, since the suspension or change of an effective antiretroviral therapy is not recommended. Moreover, the choice of a hypolipidemic drug is often a reason of concern, since expected drug-drug interactions (especially with antiretroviral agents), toxicity, intolerance, effects on concurrent HIV-related disease and decrease patient adherence to multiple pharmacological regimens must be carefully evaluated. Often the lipid goals of patients in this group are not achieved by the therapy recommended in the current lipid guidelines and in this article we describe other possibilities to treat lipid disorders in HIV-infected persons, like rosuvastatin, ezetimibe and fish oil