Clinical trial of low-dose theophylline and montelukast in patients with poorly controlled asthma

Charles G. Irvin, David A. Kaminsky, Nicholas R. Anthonisen, Mario Castro, Nicola A. Hanania, Janet Teresa Holbrook, John J. Lima, Robert A Wise

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend addition of controller medications for patients with poorly controlled asthma. Wecompared the effectiveness of once-daily oral controller therapy with either an antileukotriene receptor antagonist (montelukast) or low-dose theophylline added to existing medications in patients with poorly controlled asthma. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial in 489 participants with poorly controlled asthma randomly assigned to placebo, theophylline (300 mg/d), or montelukast (10 mg/d). Participants were monitored for 24 wk to measure the rate of episodes of poor asthma control (EPACs) defined by decreased peak flow, increased β-agonist use, increased oral corticosteroid use, or unscheduled health care visits. Observations: There was no significant difference in EPAC rates (events/person/yr) compared with placebo: low-dose theophylline, 4.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-6.7; not significant); montelukast, 4.0 (95% CI, 3.0-5.4; not significant); and placebo, 4.9 (95% CI, 3.8-6.4). Both montelukast and theophylline caused small improvements in prebronchodilator FEV1 of borderline significance. Nausea was more common with theophylline only during the first 4 wk of treatment. Neither treatment improved asthma symptoms or quality of life. However, in patients not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, addition of low-dose theophylline significantly (p <0.002) improved asthma control and symptoms as well as lung function. Conclusions: Neither montelukast nor low-dose theophylline lowered the EPAC rate of poor asthma control in patients with poorly controlled asthma despite improved lung function. For patients not using inhaled corticosteroids, low-dose theophylline improved asthma symptom control more than montelukast or placebo, and provides a safe and low-cost alternative asthma treatment.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)235-242
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Volume175
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2007

Fingerprint

montelukast
Theophylline
Asthma
Clinical Trials
Placebos
Adrenal Cortex Hormones
Confidence Intervals

Keywords

  • Antiasthmatic agents
  • Bronchodilator agents
  • Clinical trial
  • Multicenter studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

Cite this

Clinical trial of low-dose theophylline and montelukast in patients with poorly controlled asthma. / Irvin, Charles G.; Kaminsky, David A.; Anthonisen, Nicholas R.; Castro, Mario; Hanania, Nicola A.; Holbrook, Janet Teresa; Lima, John J.; Wise, Robert A.

In: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Vol. 175, No. 3, 01.02.2007, p. 235-242.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Irvin, Charles G. ; Kaminsky, David A. ; Anthonisen, Nicholas R. ; Castro, Mario ; Hanania, Nicola A. ; Holbrook, Janet Teresa ; Lima, John J. ; Wise, Robert A. / Clinical trial of low-dose theophylline and montelukast in patients with poorly controlled asthma. In: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2007 ; Vol. 175, No. 3. pp. 235-242.
@article{0f0e313a134a4ee7ad5ecd6bb7c64a63,
title = "Clinical trial of low-dose theophylline and montelukast in patients with poorly controlled asthma",
abstract = "Background: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend addition of controller medications for patients with poorly controlled asthma. Wecompared the effectiveness of once-daily oral controller therapy with either an antileukotriene receptor antagonist (montelukast) or low-dose theophylline added to existing medications in patients with poorly controlled asthma. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial in 489 participants with poorly controlled asthma randomly assigned to placebo, theophylline (300 mg/d), or montelukast (10 mg/d). Participants were monitored for 24 wk to measure the rate of episodes of poor asthma control (EPACs) defined by decreased peak flow, increased β-agonist use, increased oral corticosteroid use, or unscheduled health care visits. Observations: There was no significant difference in EPAC rates (events/person/yr) compared with placebo: low-dose theophylline, 4.9 (95{\%} confidence interval [CI], 3.6-6.7; not significant); montelukast, 4.0 (95{\%} CI, 3.0-5.4; not significant); and placebo, 4.9 (95{\%} CI, 3.8-6.4). Both montelukast and theophylline caused small improvements in prebronchodilator FEV1 of borderline significance. Nausea was more common with theophylline only during the first 4 wk of treatment. Neither treatment improved asthma symptoms or quality of life. However, in patients not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, addition of low-dose theophylline significantly (p <0.002) improved asthma control and symptoms as well as lung function. Conclusions: Neither montelukast nor low-dose theophylline lowered the EPAC rate of poor asthma control in patients with poorly controlled asthma despite improved lung function. For patients not using inhaled corticosteroids, low-dose theophylline improved asthma symptom control more than montelukast or placebo, and provides a safe and low-cost alternative asthma treatment.",
keywords = "Antiasthmatic agents, Bronchodilator agents, Clinical trial, Multicenter studies",
author = "Irvin, {Charles G.} and Kaminsky, {David A.} and Anthonisen, {Nicholas R.} and Mario Castro and Hanania, {Nicola A.} and Holbrook, {Janet Teresa} and Lima, {John J.} and Wise, {Robert A}",
year = "2007",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1164/rccm.200603-416OC",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "175",
pages = "235--242",
journal = "American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine",
issn = "1073-449X",
publisher = "American Thoracic Society",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical trial of low-dose theophylline and montelukast in patients with poorly controlled asthma

AU - Irvin, Charles G.

AU - Kaminsky, David A.

AU - Anthonisen, Nicholas R.

AU - Castro, Mario

AU - Hanania, Nicola A.

AU - Holbrook, Janet Teresa

AU - Lima, John J.

AU - Wise, Robert A

PY - 2007/2/1

Y1 - 2007/2/1

N2 - Background: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend addition of controller medications for patients with poorly controlled asthma. Wecompared the effectiveness of once-daily oral controller therapy with either an antileukotriene receptor antagonist (montelukast) or low-dose theophylline added to existing medications in patients with poorly controlled asthma. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial in 489 participants with poorly controlled asthma randomly assigned to placebo, theophylline (300 mg/d), or montelukast (10 mg/d). Participants were monitored for 24 wk to measure the rate of episodes of poor asthma control (EPACs) defined by decreased peak flow, increased β-agonist use, increased oral corticosteroid use, or unscheduled health care visits. Observations: There was no significant difference in EPAC rates (events/person/yr) compared with placebo: low-dose theophylline, 4.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-6.7; not significant); montelukast, 4.0 (95% CI, 3.0-5.4; not significant); and placebo, 4.9 (95% CI, 3.8-6.4). Both montelukast and theophylline caused small improvements in prebronchodilator FEV1 of borderline significance. Nausea was more common with theophylline only during the first 4 wk of treatment. Neither treatment improved asthma symptoms or quality of life. However, in patients not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, addition of low-dose theophylline significantly (p <0.002) improved asthma control and symptoms as well as lung function. Conclusions: Neither montelukast nor low-dose theophylline lowered the EPAC rate of poor asthma control in patients with poorly controlled asthma despite improved lung function. For patients not using inhaled corticosteroids, low-dose theophylline improved asthma symptom control more than montelukast or placebo, and provides a safe and low-cost alternative asthma treatment.

AB - Background: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend addition of controller medications for patients with poorly controlled asthma. Wecompared the effectiveness of once-daily oral controller therapy with either an antileukotriene receptor antagonist (montelukast) or low-dose theophylline added to existing medications in patients with poorly controlled asthma. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial in 489 participants with poorly controlled asthma randomly assigned to placebo, theophylline (300 mg/d), or montelukast (10 mg/d). Participants were monitored for 24 wk to measure the rate of episodes of poor asthma control (EPACs) defined by decreased peak flow, increased β-agonist use, increased oral corticosteroid use, or unscheduled health care visits. Observations: There was no significant difference in EPAC rates (events/person/yr) compared with placebo: low-dose theophylline, 4.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6-6.7; not significant); montelukast, 4.0 (95% CI, 3.0-5.4; not significant); and placebo, 4.9 (95% CI, 3.8-6.4). Both montelukast and theophylline caused small improvements in prebronchodilator FEV1 of borderline significance. Nausea was more common with theophylline only during the first 4 wk of treatment. Neither treatment improved asthma symptoms or quality of life. However, in patients not receiving inhaled corticosteroids, addition of low-dose theophylline significantly (p <0.002) improved asthma control and symptoms as well as lung function. Conclusions: Neither montelukast nor low-dose theophylline lowered the EPAC rate of poor asthma control in patients with poorly controlled asthma despite improved lung function. For patients not using inhaled corticosteroids, low-dose theophylline improved asthma symptom control more than montelukast or placebo, and provides a safe and low-cost alternative asthma treatment.

KW - Antiasthmatic agents

KW - Bronchodilator agents

KW - Clinical trial

KW - Multicenter studies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33846829665&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33846829665&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1164/rccm.200603-416OC

DO - 10.1164/rccm.200603-416OC

M3 - Article

VL - 175

SP - 235

EP - 242

JO - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

JF - American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

SN - 1073-449X

IS - 3

ER -