Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Brian J Lipworth Department of Clinical
Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School,
University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 9SY
b.j.lipworth{at}dundee.ac.uk
The drug treatment of asthma has remained essentially
unchanged over the past three decades in terms of the use of
corticosteroid,
I searched Medline and BIDS for articles published
between 1977 and 1998, using appropriate index terms for each drug or
class of drugs. I included key review articles and searched manually for relevant papers and abstracts in recent issues of mainstream journals on general, respiratory, and allergy medicine. This article was also based on personal, long standing, clinical and research interests in the management of allergy and asthma. Some aspects of this
review will inevitably be based on personal opinion, particularly where
the latest guidelines are already out of date The past decade of research has led to a greater understanding of
the pathophysiology of asthma and, in particular, the pivotal role of
the underlying inflammatory process (fig 1). Current asthma management
guidelines stress the importance of switching off the inflammatory
process at the top of the cascade by giving first line preventitive
treatment with inhaled corticosteroids, thereby reducing the need to
provide symptomatic relief with short acting
Goals
Inhaled corticosteroids are the most potent anti-inflammatory
agents for treating asthma and act in a relatively non-specific manner
by inhibiting a variety of inflammatory cells, cytokine expression, and
transcription factors which are involved in the inflammatory disease
process.4 The anti-inflammatory effects of inhaled
corticosteroids have been shown in bronchial biopsy studies.5 The delivery directly to the airway of
relatively small doses of topically active corticosteroid, along with
an extensive degree of hepatic first pass inactivation of the swallowed moiety, results in a high therapeutic index
Table 1.
2 agonist, and theophylline drugs.
Asthma treatment has also been improved by the widespread dissemination
and implementation of management guidelines emphasising the pivotal
role of first line preventative, anti-inflammatory
therapy.
1 2
This article provides a brief overview of
modern drug treatment for chronic asthma. It does not cover the
treatment of acute asthma, which is discussed in detail
elsewhere.3
Summary points
The dose of inhaled steroid should be titrated against asthmatic
symptoms, peak flow, and usage of
2 agonist drugs
The safest dose of inhaled steroid is the lowest effective maintenance
dose producing optimal long term control and quality of life
Adding second line anti-inflammatory controller treatment such as a
leukotriene antagonist or theophylline may be an alternative to
monotherapy with a high dose of inhaled steroid
If control is inadequate despite optimised anti-inflammatory treatment,
it is better to add regular treatment with a long acting
2 agonist drug than a short acting one
![]()
Methods
Top
Methods
First principles of treatment
Corticosteroids
Cromones
Leukotriene antagonists
Antihistamines
Theophyllines
![]()
2 agonists
Conclusions
References
for example, with the
emerging role of leukotriene antagonists.

View larger version (14K):
[in a new window]
Fig 1.
The inflammatory cascade in asthma
![]()
First principles of treatment
Top
Methods
First principles of treatment
Corticosteroids
Cromones
Leukotriene antagonists
Antihistamines
Theophyllines
![]()
2 agonists
Conclusions
References
2 agonists
at the bottom of the cascade. Drugs such as long acting inhaled
2 agonists, theophyllines, and anti-leukotrienes may also be used as second line "controller treatment" when given with
inhaled corticosteroids to improve symptom control and reduce diurnal
variability (fig 2). These treatment options should be used conjunction
with removal of any potential trigger factors (box).

View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
Fig 2.
The asthma treatment pyramid
Common reasons for poor response to treatment
for example, as a result of having to take drugs
(such as cromoglycate) four times daily, or polypharmacy
for example, difficulty with
metered dose inhalers
for example, allergen, smoking,
occupation, oesophageal reflux, rhinitis
for example, having chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease, bronchiectasis, or heart failure rather than asthma
A number of optimal treatment goals should be set for a given
patient within the pharmacoeconomic constraints of the available health
service provision. These goals are set out in the
box.
Goals of treatment
2 agonist drugs
![]()
Corticosteroids
Top
Methods
First principles of treatment
Corticosteroids
Cromones
Leukotriene antagonists
Antihistamines
Theophyllines
![]()
2 agonists
Conclusions
References
the ratio of
anti-asthmatic efficacy to systemic adverse effects. The inhaled
corticosteroid drugs are also the most cost effective form of treatment
for preventing asthma (table 1).
Dose-response relation
There is considerable variation between patients in the degree of
glucocorticoid receptor sensitivity, which in turn determines both the
airway and the systemic dose-response relation. For most adults with
mild to moderate asthma, the steep part of the dose-response curve for
anti-asthmatic efficacy generally occurs at doses below 800 µg/day
(400 µg/day in children) for beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide,
and triamcinolone acetonide. However, for systemic adverse effects, the
curve tends to become much steeper at doses above 800 µg/day. Even
in patients with more severe asthma, the dose-response curve for
efficacy may be relatively shallow above 800 µg/day. This
dissociation between the airway and systemic dose-response relation
results in an inverted U shaped curve for the benefit to risk ratio.
This begins to decline above a watershed of approximately 800 µg/day
(400 µg/day in children), although the exact point depends on
disease severity and individual sensitivity. Because respirable lung
dose improves greatly with the hydrofluoroalkane formulation of
beclomethasone, half the dose of the chlorofluorocarbon formulation can
be given, and it is possible to target delivery to the inflamed small airways.
Regimen
The modern management of persistent asthma with inhaled
corticosteroid drugs involves starting treatment with a relatively high
dose for four to eight weeks in order to gain rapid optimal control.
This is followed by a gradual tapering of the dose to determine the
lowest effective maintenance dose for a given person. For people with
mild to moderate asthma, effective control can usually be achieved by a
once daily regimen when the patient has been stabilised on maintenance
treatment at doses of up to 800 µg/day of budesonide or
beclomethasone. Evidence also suggests that early intervention with
inhaled corticosteroid drugs may prevent any long term decline in lung
function resulting from bronchial fibrosis caused by untreated chronic
inflammation.4
Systemic effects
The main concern with inhaled corticosteroid treatment is the
potential for dose related systemic effects. These include adrenal
suppression, osteoporosis, growth suppression, skin bruising, cataracts
and ocular hypertension. There is increasing evidence that the newer
high potency drugs such as fluticasone propionate show a less
favourable systemic bioactivity profile, although this may be partly
offset by the ability to use a lower effective maintenance dose. Three
separate dose-response studies have shown that even when correcting for
differences in topical potency, therapeutically equivalent microgram
doses of budesonide and fluticasone (half dose) exhibit at least a
1.5-fold difference in systemic bioactivity as assessed by sensitive
measures of adrenal suppression.6-8 This is supported by
a meta-analysis of 22 studies in which fluticasone propionate produced
significantly steeper dose related adrenal suppression than budesonide
(2.5-fold difference), beclomethasone dipropionate (2.1-fold
difference), or triamcinolone acetonide (3.6-fold difference)
a
finding that was particularly evident at doses above
800 µg/day.9
Local adverse effects
Local adverse effects such as oral candidiasis may be alleviated
by using a large volume spacer to reduce the deposition of drug on the
oropharynx. The occurrence of oral candidiasis is related to the dose
and to the mucosal exposure time to topical corticosteroid. Thus, a
once or twice daily dosing regimen will reduce the likelihood, and this
can be reduced further by regular mouth rinsing. Using a spacer device
has other advantages
there is increased delivery of respirable
particles and the coordination problems associated with using metered
dose inhalers are reduced.
| |
Cromones |
|---|
2 agonists
|
|---|
The cromones include sodium cromoglycate and sodium nedocromil,
which act predominantly by stabilising mast cells. These drugs are well
tolerated and have no systemic adverse effects, but they are less
effective in treating asthma than inhaled corticosteroids. The cromones
tend to be most effective in patients with mild atopic asthma,
particularly in children with an exercise or allergen induced component
to their condition. However, there is uncertainty about the degree of
anti-inflammatory activity of the cromones, at least on the basis of
bronchial biopsy studies.18 Compliance may be a problem
with these drugs as they are short acting and need to be taken four
times daily. Cromone treatment is also much more expensive than that
with low dose inhaled corticosteroid drugs (table 1).
| |
Leukotriene antagonists |
|---|
2 agonists
|
|---|
The cysteinyl leukotrienes are metabolites of arachidonic acid comprising leukotrienes C4, D4, and E4. The cysteinyl leukotrienes cause smooth muscle constriction and proliferation and are important mediators in the pathophysiology of the inflammatory process. The leukotriene antagonists such as zafirlukast (twice daily) and montelukast (once daily) are well tolerated, seem effective over a wide spectrum of disease severity, and exhibit both bronchodilator and anti-inflammatory activity.19 Responsiveness to leukotriene antagonists varies and may be genetically determined by the degree of leukotriene synthesis resulting from 5-lipoxygenase activity. In the United Kingdom, montelukast is licensed in patients aged 6 years and over as second line asthma controller treatment in combination with inhaled corticosteroids. It is only licensed as monotherapy in the prophylaxis of exercise induced asthma. Zafirlukast, however, is currently licensed in patients aged 12 years and over, including first line use instead of inhaled corticosteroids.
Advantages
One of the main advantages of the leukotriene antagonist drugs is
that they are active orally, which avoids the potential compliance
problems with the inhaled route. The compliance factor with leukotriene
antagonists may also be reinforced by the fact that they work within
the first 24 hours, while inhaled corticosteroids take much longer to
achieve maximal response. The leukotriene antagonists are comparable in
cost with long acting
2 agonists, but are much more
expensive than low dose inhaled corticosteroids (table 1).
Additive effects
Preliminary data with montelukast and zafirlukast suggest that
they show additive effects to low or high dose inhaled corticosteroids.20-23 In multicentre studies, montelukast
in children (5 mg once daily) or adults (10 mg once daily) was better
than placebo at controlling asthma over eight to 12 weeks, and this effect was seen equally in patients taking or not taking
corticosteroids.
24 25
In addition, montelukast and
placebo showed no differences in adverse effects on biochemical liver
function tests. Regular treatment with montelukast produces a
sustained, high level of protection against exercise induced
bronchoconstriction, in contrast with salmeterol, which induces
tolerance.26 Another potential advantage of leukotriene
antagonist drugs is that they are effective in treating coexistent
allergic rhinitis.27 A Churg-Strauss-like syndrome has
been reported with zafirlukast and montelukast; this is probably due to
an unmasking of the underlying condition caused by tapering of
concomitant oral corticosteroids, and reinforces that leukotriene
antagonists should not be used instead of oral corticosteroids in
dependent patients with severe asthma.
Need for further data
Thus, there seem to be logical reasons for using leukotriene
antagonists as second line controller treatment in that they possess
both anti-inflammatory and bronchodilator activity, afford
bronchoprotection against allergen and exercise, do not exhibit
tachyphylaxis, and are well tolerated (table 2). Bronchial biopsy
studies show anti-inflammatory effects of leukotriene antagonists in
reducing numbers of T lymphocytes, mast cells, and
eosinophils.28 However, further efficacy and safety data from long term studies are needed to establish the appropriate place of
leukotriene antagonists in asthma treatment guidelines
in particular,
whether they should be used as an alternative to low dose inhaled
corticosteroid as first line monotherapy in patients with mild to
moderate persistent asthma.
|
| |
Antihistamines |
|---|
2 agonists
|
|---|
Cetirizine and loratidine are examples of potent, selective, type
I histamine receptor antagonists that are well tolerated and are taken
on a once daily basis. They have a limited role in treating asthma in
patients with a known allergenic trigger factor such as pollen or
animal fur. They may also be of value where there is associated
seasonal allergic rhinitis and conjunctivitis or if there is associated
allergic urticaria. Preliminary data suggest that antihistamines and
leukotriene antagonists may show additive effects on control in asthma
and allergic rhinitis.
27 29
Antihistamines should never
be used as monotherapy for chronic asthma, but only as an adjunct to
inhaled corticosteroids.
| |
Theophyllines |
|---|
2 agonists
|
|---|
The bronchodilator activity of oral theophylline is relatively weak and high doses are needed. Lower doses of theophylline show anti-inflammatory effects, and this finding led to a reappraisal of theophylline's role as second line controller treatment in addition to inhaled corticosteroids. 30 31 The advantages of theophylline are that it may be taken once or twice daily as an oral slow release formulation and is inexpensive (table 1).
The main disadvantages of theophylline are several important potential
drug interactions that may result in drug toxicity as well as the
expense and inconvenience of therapeutic drug monitoring (table 2).
Although the adverse effects of theophylline are related to the plasma
concentration, the drug tends to be less well tolerated, even at low
doses, than other second line controller drugs such as leukotriene
antagonists or long acting
2 agonists.
| |
2 agonists |
|---|
2 agonists
|
|---|
The
2 agonist drugs act primarily on airway smooth
muscle and are the most effective form of bronchodilator treatment.
Their effects on smooth muscle and mast cells result in protection
against several stimuli of bronchoconstriction. For example, inhaled
2 agonists are highly effective at preventing
bronchoconstriction when used shortly before exercise or exposure to
known allergens. Evidence suggests that regular use of short acting
2 agonists may worsen control of asthma, although this
claim remains controversial.32 The requirement for regular
use of reliever treatment with short acting
2 agonists
marks an activated inflammatory cascade and hence the need to step up
the dose of inhaled corticosteroid (fig 1).
Long acting
2 agonists
The long acting
2 agonists salmeterol and eformoterol became available against this background of recommending short acting
2 agonists for occasional use as a
reliever. These drugs are now included in the guidelines for regular,
twice daily use as second line controller treatment in conjunction with
a low dose of inhaled corticosteroid.
1 2
This
recommendation is based on studies which showed that adding a long
acting
2 agonist to a low dose of inhaled corticosteroid
drug produced comparable control to monotherapy with a higher dose of
inhaled corticosteroid.33
Concerns
There is concern that the regular use of long acting
2 agonists may simply palliate the sequelae of an
activated inflammatory cascade without suppressing the underlying
inflammatory process, particularly as
2 agonists have no
anti-inflammatory activity (table 2).34 None the less,
long acting
2 agonists may be valuable when given
regularly for persistent symptoms in patients who would otherwise need
to use short acting
2 agonists frequently, provided
adequate anti-inflammatory treatment is also being taken.
2
agonists develops when these drugs are given regularly and that this is
more pronounced for loss of bronchoprotective activity than bronchodilator activity.
35 36
Moreover, the development
of tolerance with long acting
2 agonists occurs in
genetically predisposed people. They have a particular variant of the
2 adrenoceptor, which occurs in up to 50% of white
people in the United Kingdom.37 This genetic
polymorphism of the
2 adrenoceptor may also explain individual variation in the clinical response to long acting
2 agonist treatment. Eformoterol is a more potent drug
and has a faster onset of action than salmeterol. It may therefore be
used as required for reliever treatment up to the maximum recommended twice daily dose. This type of "as required" dosing regimen with eformoterol is not recommended in current asthma guidelines. Nor, however, does it seem appropriate to advocate its regular use in every
case, particularly if it is not needed all the time. New fixed dose
combinations of fluticasone and salmeterol will soon become available
in the United Kingdom. Although they might improve compliance, such
formulations are less flexible and may inadvertently result in patients
taking unnecessary long term treatment with long acting
2 agonists.
Controlled release oral salbutamol or oral bambuterol (a prodrug of
terbutaline) may, like long acting
2 agonists, be used to treat nocturnal symptoms. Although the oral formulations tend to be
associated with systemic effects such as tremor and tachycardia, these
usually wear off because of tolerance. None the less, drugs such as
bambuterol are less expensive than long acting
2
agonists and, like theophylline, have the advantage of being taken as a once daily tablet.
| |
Conclusions |
|---|
2 agonists
|
|---|
Inhaled corticosteroids should be used as early as possible
as first line anti-inflammatory treatment for patients presenting with
symptoms of persistent asthma. For patients who have mild to moderate
asthma, there is no proved therapeutic benefit in using more potent and
expensive drugs such as fluticasone propionate than older and cheaper
drugs such as beclomethasone dipropionate. The therapeutic index for
inhaled corticosteroids can be optimised by tapering the dose until the
lowest effective maintenance dose is achieved and by using a metered
dose inhaler with a spacer device. Second line anti-inflammatory
controller treatment may be added as an alternative to monotherapy with
a high dose of inhaled corticosteroid in order to avoid any local and
systemic adverse effects with the latter treatment. In this respect,
there seems to be a rationale for adding treatment with leukotriene antagonists such as montelukast or zafirlukast. These have
anti-inflammatory and bronchodilator properties, do not induce
tolerance, and can be taken as a once or twice daily tablet. Further
long term studies are required to evaluate the position of leukotriene
antagonists as first line preventer treatment instead of low dose
inhaled corticosteroid drugs in patients with mild to moderate asthma. Theophylline is a cheaper alternative for second line combined anti-inflammatory treatment, but has a lower therapeutic index that
requires drug monitoring and shows several important potential drug
interactions. If asthma control is inadequate and reliever drugs need
to be taken frequently, despite optimised anti-inflammatory treatment,
regular treatment with long acting
2 agonists is
preferred to that with short acting
2 agonists.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
Funding: None.
Competing interests: BL has been reimbursed by the following companies for speaking at educational symposiums, consultancy work, research funding, or attending scientific meetings: Rhone Poulenc Rorer, Astra Draco, Boehringer Ingelheim, 3M Health Care, ML Laboratories, Novartis, Merck, Glaxo-Wellcome, Zeneca, Shering Plough. His spouse currently has shares in Glaxo-Wellcome and Astra.
| |
References |
|---|
2 agonists
|
|---|
2-agonist terbutaline on airway inflammation in newly diagnosed asthma.
J Allergy Clin Immunol
1992;
90:
32-42[Medline].
2-adrenoceptor polymorphism and susceptibility to bronchodilator desensitisation on moderately severe stable asthmatics.
Lancet
1997;
350:
995-999[Medline].
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+