Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2001
…
5 pages
1 file
An open cross-over and randomized study was carried out in order to compare the e⁄cacy and safety of inhaled salbutamol delivered from a new 50 mg dose À1 metered-dose dry powder inhalerTaifun s , and a commercially available 50 mg dose À1 dry powder inhalerTurbuhaler s , and a conventional100 mg dose À1 pressurized metered-dose inhaler with a spacer (pMDI+S).Twenty-one patients, aged 21^70 years, with stable asthma and with demonstrated reversibility upon inhalation of salbutamol were included in the study.On three separate study days, the patients received a total dose of 400 mg of salbutamol from the dry powder inhalers and a dose of 800 mg from the pMDI+S in a cumulative fashion:1,1, 2 and 4 doses at 30 min intervals.The per cent change in forced expiratory volume in1sec (FEV 1), was used as the primary e⁄cacy variable. Salbutamol inhaled via theTaifun s produced greater bronchodilation than the other devices.The di¡erence in percent change in FEV 1 between theTaifun s and the other devices was statistically signi¢cant at the two ¢rst dose levels, but diminished towards the higher doses when the plateau of the dose^response curve was reached.The estimated relative dose potency oftheTaifun s was approximately1?9-and 2?8-fold compared to theTurbuhaler s and the pMDI+S, respectively.TheTaifun s caused a slight, butclinicallyinsigni¢cant, decreasein serum potassium concentration.There were no signi¢cantchangesinthe other safetyparameters (blood pressure, heartrate and electrocardiogram recordings) with any of the used devices. In conclusion, this study indicates that salbutamol inhaled via the Taifun s is more potentthan salbutamolinhaled from the other devices tested.In practise, a smaller total dose of salbutamol from theTaifun s is needed to produce a similar bronchodilatory response. All treatments were equally well tolerated.r 2001Harcourt Publishers Ltd
Medical Journal of Australia, 1989
Twenty-one patients with mild-to-moderately-severe asthma participated in a placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over, randomized bronchodilator study of 200 Ilg of salbutamol (Glaxo) and 200 Ilg of salbutamol in the form of salbutamol sulphate (Riker;SO-Illand 2SiJl valves) that were administered by metered-dose inhalers. The mean baseline forced expired volumes in one second (FEY1) were similar for the four separate study days. The three active treatments caused a significantly-greater FEY1 response than did placebo for four hours (P<O.OS) and no difference was found between the treatments (P> O.OS). The power of the study was 7S% with a clinically-significant difference in the FEY 1 response of 2S%. The administration of 200 Ilg of salbutamol (Glaxo) caused the same FEY1 response as did that of 400 Ilg of salbutamol at the end of that study day (P> O.OS), but both 200-llg doses of salbutamol sulphate (Riker) caused a smaller FEY 1 response than did the 400 Ilg of salbutamol sulphate (P<O.OS). These observations indicate that no clinically-significant difference occurs between the bronchodilator effects of salbutamol and those of salbutamol sulphate which is administered as 200 Ilg of salbutamol equivalent, with different propellant mixtures, dispersal agents and valvular systems.
CHEST Journal, 2000
To determine the protective effect of salbutamol, 100 g, inhaled by different devices (pressurized metered-dose inhaler [pMDI; Ventolin; GlaxoWellcome; Greenford, UK], pMDI ؉ spacer [Volumatic; GlaxoWellcome], or breath-activated pMDI [Autohaler; 3M Pharmaceuticals; St. Paul, MN]) on bronchoconstriction induced by methacholine. Design: Randomized, double-blind, cross-over, placebo-controlled study. Patients: Eighteen subjects with stable, moderate asthma, asymptomatic, receiving regular treatment with salmeterol, 50 g bid, and inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate, 250 g bid, in the last 6 months, with high hyperreactivity to methacholine (baseline provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV 1 [PD 20 ] geometric mean [GM], 0.071 mg). Subjects were classified into two groups: subjects with incorrect (n ؍ 5) pMDI inhalation technique, and subjects with correct (n ؍ 13) inhalation technique. Methods and measurements: After cessation of therapy for 3 days, all subjects underwent four methacholine challenge tests, each test 1 week apart, each time 15 min after inhalation of salbutamol, 100 g (via pMDI, pMDI ؉ spacer, or Autohaler), or placebo. The protective effect on methacholine challenge test was evaluated as the change in the PD 20 , and expressed in terms of doubling doses of methacholine in comparison with placebo treatment. Results: The PD 20 was significantly higher after salbutamol inhalation than after placebo inhalation, but no significant difference was observed among the three different inhalation techniques. Only when salbutamol was inhaled via pMDI ؉ spacer, PD 20 was slightly but not significantly higher (pMDI GM, 0.454 mg; pMDI ؉ spacer GM, 0.559 mg; and Autohaler GM, 0.372 mg; not significant [NS]) than other inhalation techniques. Similar results (mean ؎SEM) were obtained with doubling doses of methacholine (pMDI, 2 ؎ 0.47; pMDI ؉ spacer, 3 ؎ 0.35; and Autohaler, 2.4 ؎ 0.40; NS). No significant difference was found among techniques when subjects with correct or incorrect inhalation technique were separately considered. Conclusions: Our data show that the protective effect of salbutamol, 100 g, on methacholineinduced bronchoconstriction is not affected by the different inhalation techniques, although inhalation via pMDI ؉ spacer tends to improve the bronchoprotective ability of salbutamol. These data confirm the clinical efficacy of salbutamol, whatever the device, and the patient's inhalation technique.
American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 1996
Two cumulative doses of salbutamol delivered by metered dose inhaler (MDI) with a pear-shaped spacer were compared (400 I~g vs 600 I~g at 10-minute intervals). Twenty-two patients (mean age 35.1 -+ 11.1 years) with acute exacerbation of asthma were randomly assigned, in a doubleblind fashion, to receive salbutamol delivered with MDI into a spacer device in 4 puffs at 10-minute intervals (100 I~g or 150 Fg per actuation) during 3 hours (1200 t~g or 1800 I~g each 30 minutes). Mean peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) and forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEVl) improved significantly over baseline values for both groups (P < .001). Nevertheless, there were no significant differences between both groups for PEFR and FEVI at any time point studied. A significant net reduction of heart rate was observed in the 400 ~g group (P < .01). On the other hand, a significant increase in heart rate was observed in the 600 iLg group (P < .001). The QTc interval did not show a significant prolongation, and the two groups presented moderate decreases of serum potassium levels. There was a significant dose-related increase (P = .027) in Sao2. Additionally, the 600 ~g group generated a serum glucose level increase from 0.85 + 0.12 mg/100 mL to 1.04 + 0.25 mg/100 mL (P = .02). At the end of treatment, the salbutamol plasma levels were 10.0 -+ 1.67 ng/mL for the 400 I~g group, and 14.0 + 2.17 for the 600 Izg group (P = .001). Finally, the overall symptom score in patients in the 600 ~g group was significantly greater than the score in the low dose group (P = ,02), with a higher incidence in 4 symptoms (tremor, headache, palpitations, and anxiety). These data support the notion that the treatment of acute asthma patients in the emergency department setting with salbutamol, 2.4 rag/h, delivered by MDI and spacer (4 puffs at 10-minute intervals) produces satisfactory bronchodilation, low serum concentration, and minimal extrapulmonary effects, However, an increase of 50% of the dose (600 p,g at 10-minute intervals) produced a nonsignificant, slightly better therapeutic response but with greater side effects, probably related to higher salbutamol levels.
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2005
Aims The Aerodose® inhaler is a novel, palm-sized, breath actuated device which requires little patient coordination. This study compared the dose-response of salbutamol delivered by the Aerodose® Inhaler (Aerogen Inc., Mountain View, USA) vs Pari LC Plus jet nebulizer (Pari LC Plus; Pari GmbH, Starnberg, Germany) and Ventolin™ Evohaler™ HFA pMDI (Evohaler; Allen & Hanburys [GlaxoSmithkline], Uxbridge, UK). Methods Twenty-two moderate to severe asthmatic patients, mean (s.d.) age: 44.7 (9.4), F EV 1 : 58.1 (12.0), received 4 cumulative doubling doses of salbutamol in a randomised, investigator blind, balanced crossover design. Spirometry and systemic safety variables (heart rate, blood pressure, T wave amplitude, QTc interval and potassium) were measured at baseline and after each dose. Results Parallel regression analysis revealed that microgram relative potency ratios for the Aerodose® Inhaler to be five times more efficient for FEV 1 than either the Pari LC Plus (0.202, 90% CI: 0.189-0.216) or the Evohaler (0.202, 90% CI: 0.189-0.216), while there was no difference between Pari LC Plus vs Evohaler. Similarly, Aerodose® Inhaler vs. Pari LC Plus showed approximately five-fold greater potency for all systemic parameters, except blood pressure. As compared to the Evohaler, Aerodose® Inhaler had equivalent potency for plasma potassium and T wave amplitude, but demonstrated greater potency for heart rate and QT c interval. Conclusions This study has indicated therefore, that Aerodose® Inhaler is approximately five times as efficient as the Pari LC Plus and Evohaler in relative lung delivery of salbutamol in moderate to severe asthmatics.
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2005
AimsMethods to determine the lung delivery of inhaled bronchodilators from metered dose inhalers include urinary drug excretion 30 min post inhalation and methacholine challenge (PD20). We have compared these two methods to differentiate lung delivery of salbutamol from metered dose inhalers using different inhalation methods.Methods to determine the lung delivery of inhaled bronchodilators from metered dose inhalers include urinary drug excretion 30 min post inhalation and methacholine challenge (PD20). We have compared these two methods to differentiate lung delivery of salbutamol from metered dose inhalers using different inhalation methods.MethodsIn phase 1 of the study, on randomized study days, 12 mild asthmatics inhaled placebo, one and two 100 µg salbutamol doses from a breath actuated metered dose inhaler, in randomized fashion on different days. In phase 2, they inhaled one 100 µg salbutamol dose from a metered dose inhaler using a SLOW (20 l min−1) and a FAST (60 l min−1) inhalation technique and a slow inhalation delayed until after they had inhaled for 5 s (LATE). Urinary excretion of salbutamol (0–30 min) and PD20 were measured after each dose.In phase 1 of the study, on randomized study days, 12 mild asthmatics inhaled placebo, one and two 100 µg salbutamol doses from a breath actuated metered dose inhaler, in randomized fashion on different days. In phase 2, they inhaled one 100 µg salbutamol dose from a metered dose inhaler using a SLOW (20 l min−1) and a FAST (60 l min−1) inhalation technique and a slow inhalation delayed until after they had inhaled for 5 s (LATE). Urinary excretion of salbutamol (0–30 min) and PD20 were measured after each dose.ResultsFollowing placebo, one and two 100 µg salbutamol doses, the geometric mean for PD20 was 0.10, 0.41 and 0.86 mg respectively and the mean (SD) urinary drug excretion after one and two doses was 2.25 (0.65) and 5.37 (1.36) µg, respectively. After SLOW, FAST and LATE inhalations the geometric mean for PD20 was 0.50, 0.40 and 0.42 mg, respectively, and mean (SD) salbutamol excretion was 2.67 (0.84), 1.90 (0.70) and 2.72 (0.67) µg, respectively. Only the amount of drug excreted during the FAST compared with the SLOW and LATE inhalations showed a statistical difference (95% confidence interval on the difference 0.12, 1.54 and 0.06,1.59 µg, respectively).Following placebo, one and two 100 µg salbutamol doses, the geometric mean for PD20 was 0.10, 0.41 and 0.86 mg respectively and the mean (SD) urinary drug excretion after one and two doses was 2.25 (0.65) and 5.37 (1.36) µg, respectively. After SLOW, FAST and LATE inhalations the geometric mean for PD20 was 0.50, 0.40 and 0.42 mg, respectively, and mean (SD) salbutamol excretion was 2.67 (0.84), 1.90 (0.70) and 2.72 (0.67) µg, respectively. Only the amount of drug excreted during the FAST compared with the SLOW and LATE inhalations showed a statistical difference (95% confidence interval on the difference 0.12, 1.54 and 0.06,1.59 µg, respectively).ConclusionsUrinary salbutamol excretion but not PD20 showed differences between the inhalation methods used. When using a metered dose inhaler slow inhalation is better and co-ordination is not essential if the patient is inhaling when they actuate a dose of the drug.Urinary salbutamol excretion but not PD20 showed differences between the inhalation methods used. When using a metered dose inhaler slow inhalation is better and co-ordination is not essential if the patient is inhaling when they actuate a dose of the drug.
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1995
Background: New formulations of non-chlorofluorocarbon-containing propellants for pressurized metered-dose inhaler delivery systems must be developed in response to the forthcoming ban on chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) production. Objective: This study compared the bronchodilator effects of 100, 200, and 300 lag (base equivalent) of salbutamol in a novel CFC-free propellant system (Airomir in the 3M CFC-Free System; 3M Pharmaceuticals, St. Paul, Minn.; 108 IN of salbutamol sulfate or 90 IN of salbutamol base equivalent per inhalation) with that of 100 and 200 ixg of salbutamol base in a conventional CFC propellant system (Ventolin, CFC-11/12; Allen and Hanburys, Division of Glaxo Inc., Research Triangle Park, N.C.; 90 tN of salbutamol base per inhalation) and placebo. Methods: Twenty-six patients with chronic, stable asthma, who had a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) between 50.0% and 75.0% of predicted normal value, entered this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, 6-period, crossover study. FEV 1 was measured before and at multiple time points (ranging from 10 to 480 minutes) after administration of one, two, and three inhalations of salbutamol/CFC-free (100, 200, and 300 IN); one and two inhalations of salbutamol/CFC ; and placebo. Safety parameters included adverse events, heart rate, blood pressure, physical examinations, electrocardiograms, and clinical laboratory tests. Parametric analysis of variance models appropriate for a 6-period crossover design were used, along with multiple comparisons according to Tukey's method. Results: All active treatments produced significantly (p < O. 0001) greater bronchodilation than placebo. The bronchodilator effect, as measured by FEV z (peak percent change, peak as a percent of predicted value, duration, and area under the curve) after two inhalations of salbutumol/CFC-free was clinically comparable to two inhalations of salbutamol/CFC, with no clinically meaningful differences in safety parameters between the two delivery systems or between different dose levels. Conclusion: These results suggest that salbutamol/CFC-free may offer a suitable alternative for salbutamol/CFC when the need arises to change from CFC-containing salbutamol products. (J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUNOL 1995;96.'50-6.)
Respiratory Medicine, 2002
This randomized, placebo-controlled, evaluator-blind, five-way crossover study compared the equivalence in terms of FEV1 response to single ascending cumulative doses of salbutamol (100–400 μg) from AirmaxTM, a new multidose dry powder inhaler, in comparison with placebo, the same dose from a standard pressurized metered dose inhaler (Ventolin®) or at double the dose from the dry powder inhalers Diskhaler® and Accuhaler®.
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 1995
Background: New formulations of non-chlorofluorocarbon-containing propellants for pressurized metered-dose inhaler delivery systems must be developed in response to the forthcoming ban on chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) production. Objective: This study compared the bronchodilator effects of 100, 200, and 300 lag (base equivalent) of salbutamol in a novel CFC-free propellant system (Airomir in the 3M CFC-Free System; 3M Pharmaceuticals, St. Paul, Minn.; 108 IN of salbutamol sulfate or 90 IN of salbutamol base equivalent per inhalation) with that of 100 and 200 ixg of salbutamol base in a conventional CFC propellant system (Ventolin, CFC-11/12; Allen and Hanburys, Division of Glaxo Inc., Research Triangle Park, N.C.; 90 tN of salbutamol base per inhalation) and placebo. Methods: Twenty-six patients with chronic, stable asthma, who had a forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) between 50.0% and 75.0% of predicted normal value, entered this randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, 6-period, crossover study. FEV 1 was measured before and at multiple time points (ranging from 10 to 480 minutes) after administration of one, two, and three inhalations of salbutamol/CFC-free (100, 200, and 300 IN); one and two inhalations of salbutamol/CFC ; and placebo. Safety parameters included adverse events, heart rate, blood pressure, physical examinations, electrocardiograms, and clinical laboratory tests. Parametric analysis of variance models appropriate for a 6-period crossover design were used, along with multiple comparisons according to Tukey's method. Results: All active treatments produced significantly (p < O. 0001) greater bronchodilation than placebo. The bronchodilator effect, as measured by FEV z (peak percent change, peak as a percent of predicted value, duration, and area under the curve) after two inhalations of salbutumol/CFC-free was clinically comparable to two inhalations of salbutamol/CFC, with no clinically meaningful differences in safety parameters between the two delivery systems or between different dose levels. Conclusion: These results suggest that salbutamol/CFC-free may offer a suitable alternative for salbutamol/CFC when the need arises to change from CFC-containing salbutamol products. (J ALLERGY CLIN IMMUNOL 1995;96.'50-6.)
The aim of the present study was to demonstrate the effect of inhalation-flow, inhalationvolume and number of inhalations on aerosol-delivery of inhaled-salbutamol from two different dry powder inhalers (DPIs) in both healthy-subjects and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Relative pulmonary-bioavailability and systemic-bioavailability of inhaled-salbutamol, delivered by Diskus and Aerolizer, was determined in 24-COPD patients and 24-healthy subjects. The healthy-subjects and the COPD-patients participated in the study for 7 days in which they received 4 study doses of 200 lg salbutamol (one slow-inhalation, two slow-inhalations, one fast-inhalation, and two fast-inhalations) in four alternative days with 24 hr washout period after each dose. Two urine-samples were collected from each study subjects. The first was provided 30 min post inhalation (USAL0.5), as an index of relative pulmonary-bioavailability, and the second was pooled to 24 hr post inhalation (USAL24), as an index of systemic-bioavailability. Fast-inhalation resulted in significantly higher USAL0.5 and USAL24 than slow-inhalation (p˂ 0.05) after one-inhalation in both healthy-subjects and COPD-patients but there was no significant difference between slow and fast-inhalation after two-inhalations. One-inhalation resulted in significantly higher USAL0.5 and USAL24 in healthy-subjects compared to COPD-patient at both slow and fastinhalation (p˂0.05) except USAL0.5 with Diskus at slow-inhalation there was no significant difference. Also, two-inhalations resulted in significantly higher USAL0.5 and USAL24 compared to one-inhalation at slow-inhalation only (p˂0.05). No significant difference was found between Aerolizer and Diskus except in USAL0.5 of one slow-inhalation in both healthsubjects and COPD-patients (p ¼ 0.048 and 0.047, respectively). Device-formula relation is present at low inhalation-flow since Diskus resulted in significantly higher USAL0.5 and USAL24 in healthy-subjects compared to COPD-patient at slow inhalation than Aerolizer. It is essential to inhale-twice and as hard and deep as possible from each dose when using DPI especially with COPD-patients having poor inspiratory efforts such as elderly patients and children.
Canadian Respiratory Journal, 1997
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare two dosing regimens of salbutamol in acute asthma.DESIGN: Prospective randomized double-blind trial.SETTING: Urban emergency department.TYPE OF PARTICIPANTS: Patients who presented to the emergency department with moderate to severe asthma.INTERVENTIONS: All patients had pulmonary function testing and were randomized to group A (control; n=25) or group B (experimental; n=23). Group A (control) patients received salbutamol 2.5 mg delivered by wet aerosol at 0, 1 and 2 h (total dose 7.5 mg). At 20, 40, 80 and 100 mins a placebo aerosol was given. Group B patients received salbutamol 5 mg at 0 min and one-third the initial dose every 20 mins for a total of six doses by wet aerosol (total dose 15 mg).RESULTS: There were no differences in age, sex, preadmission medications or initial forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) between the groups. Forty-eight patients completed the study. Both groups of patients improved with mean absolute change in FEV1of 700 mL in...
Academia Medicine, 2023
Histoire Urbaine 47, 2016
International Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2015
Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat (JPPM), 2021
Orientalia Suecana 31-32 (1982-1983) pp. 71-91.
Biosciences Biotechnology Research Asia
The World Economy, 2001
Scandinavian Political Studies, 1988
Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 2010
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2004
Arena Magazine, 1997
Ingénierie Des Systèmes D'information, 2009
Nepalese Journal of Ophthalmology
Journal of The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 2018
Chemischer Informationsdienst, 1986
The Journal of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, 2017
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Fitness & Performance Journal, 2009