Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Albuterol”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Population pharmacokinetics of (R)-albuterol and (S)-albuterol in pediatric patients aged 4-11 years with asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the population pharmacokinetics (PK) of (R)- and (S)-albuterol in pediatric asthmatics using a model that supports a sparse blood sampling strategy. METHODS: The data for this analysis were collected from patients enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo- and active-controlled study evaluating the safety and efficacy of levalbuterol in asthmatic children aged 4-11 years. Patients received either levalbuterol 0.31 mg, levalbuterol 0.63 mg, racemic albuterol 1.25 mg, or racemic albuterol 2.5 mg via nebulizer. Separate population pharmacokinetic models were developed for (R)- and (S)-albuterol using the NOMNEM((R)) computer program. Covariate models were developed to identify significant predictors of inter-patient variability. RESULTS: A total of 995 samples and 262 patients were used for the (R)-albuterol population PK model while a total of 496 samples and 128 patients were used for the (S)-albuterol population PK model. The apparent clearance of (R)-albuterol was much more rapid than that of (S)-albuterol (approximately four-fold higher), and the apparent volume of distribution was much larger for (R)-albuterol (in part due to pre-systemic metabolism) than for (S)-albuterol (approximately four-fold higher). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of pediatric patients, the models were able to demonstrate using two to four samples per patient that the apparent clearance and volume of distribution of (R)-albuterol were several fold higher than that of (S)-albuterol. The pharmacokinetics of (R)-albuterol were similar after administration of levalbuterol or racemic albuterol and were linear over the examined dose range (0.31-0.63 mg nebulized dose). The presence of (S)-albuterol did not significantly alter the pharmacokinetics of (R)-albuterol, suggesting that effects of (S)-albuterol may be due to the intrinsic pharmacology of this isomer.

Administration, Inhalation↗

The therapeutic ratio of R-albuterol is comparable with that of RS-albuterol in asthmatic patients.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that R-albuterol produces bronchodilation that is comparable with that of racemic albuterol (RS-albuterol) on a 4:1 dose-for-dose basis but systemic side effects on a 2:1 basis, implying better therapeutic ratio for R-albuterol. OBJECTIVE: We sought to carefully compare the bronchodilating and systemic effects of R- and RS-albuterol by using a crossover study design. METHODS: Twenty asthmatic patients (15.1%-28.7% FEV(1) reversibility) were given R-albuterol (6.25-1600 microg), S-albuterol (6.25-1600 microg), RS-albuterol (12.5-3200 microg), or placebo in a crossover, double-blind, placebo-controlled fashion. Cumulative doses were given with a Mefar dosimeter, and FEV(1), heart rate, and plasma K(+) levels were measured 20 minutes after each dose. RESULTS: Both R- and RS-albuterol produced dose-related improvement in FEV(1) and, at higher doses, increased heart rate and decreased plasma K(+) levels. Neither placebo nor S-albuterol had any significant effect. Individual estimates of the potency ratio for R-albuterol/RS-albuterol were calculated and summarized across all subjects. The geometric mean potency ratio for effects on FEV(1) was 1.9 (95% CI, 1.3-2.8), on HR of 1.9 (95% CI, 1.3-2.9), and on K(+) level of 1.7 (95% CI, 1.3-2.1). CONCLUSION: All pharmacologic effects of RS-albuterol reside with the R-enantiomer, and S-albuterol is clinically inactive. The R-albuterol/RS-albuterol potency ratios for local (FEV(1)) and systemic effects (heart rate and K(+)) are similar, suggesting a comparable therapeutic ratio for R-albuterol and RS-albuterol in asthmatic subjects.

Adult↗

Switching patients with asthma from chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) albuterol to hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA) albuterol.

Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) propellants deplete stratospheric ozone. Production and use of CFCs, except for certain critical exemptions, has been prohibited by the Montreal Protocol. Use of CFCs as propellants in metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) is still allowed, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is planning the transition to alternative propellants for use in MDIs. Hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA), a non-ozone-depleting propellant, has been used to reformulate albuterol (HFA albuterol). This study evaluates whether comparable safety and efficacy continues for 12 weeks after patients with asthma are switched from CFC albuterol to HFA albuterol. Patients with asthma stabilized on CFC albuterol during a 12-week safety and efficacy trial were randomized to either continue receiving CFC albuterol or to be switched to receive HFA albuterol in a yearlong safety and efficacy trial. Safety and efficacy were compared over the first 12 weeks of the yearlong trial between patients who had remained on CFC albuterol and those who had been switched to HFA albuterol. Bronchodilator efficacy was evaluated by serial spirometry for 6 hr after the patients self-administered the study drug in the clinic. Safety was assessed by measuring changes in pulse rate, blood pressure, and electrocardiogram (ECG) intervals after dosing with study drug, monitoring adverse events, and performing prestudy and poststudy laboratory testing and physical examinations. No significant differences in bronchodilator efficacy between the patients continuing to receive CFC albuterol and those switched to HFA albuterol were found in the 12 weeks after the switch. No differences between the two products were found for changes in pulse rate, blood pressure, and ECG intervals. Adverse event profiles were similar for the two products, except the patients remaining on CFC albuterol reported increased asthma symptoms and rhinitis significantly more often than the patients switched to HFA albuterol. No clinically meaningful changes in laboratory tests or physical examinations were found in either treatment group. Patients with asthma switched from CFC albuterol to HFA albuterol receive comparable bronchodilation with a similar safety profile as those continuing to receive CFC albuterol.

Adult↗

A comparison of ipratropium and albuterol vs albuterol alone for the treatment of acute asthma.

To evaluate the role of inhaled ipratropium bromide in acute asthma, a double-blind study of 384 emergency department patients compared the effect of the combination of ipratropium and albuterol with that of albuterol alone. Patients were randomized to receive nebulizer treatments with either 2.5 mg of albuterol or 2.5 mg of albuterol mixed with 0.5 mg of ipratropium bromide at entry and at 45 min. Spirometry, vital signs, and oxygen saturation were measured before and at 45 and 90 min following the nebulizer treatments. Serum potassium levels were obtained at entry and 90 min. The two groups did not differ significantly in age (mean +/- SD = 33.4 +/- 9.3 and 32.5 +/- 9.7 years for the albuterol and ipratropium group and the albuterol group, respectively), baseline FEV1 (mean +/- SD = 1.22 +/- 0.42 and 1.25 +/- 0.44 L respectively), or prior use of asthma medications. At 45 min, there were significantly more responders (15% increase in FEV1 over baseline) in the group receiving albuterol and ipratropium compared with albuterol and saline solution (85% and 78%, respectively; p = 0.045), but the median change in FEV1 from baseline did not differ (0.530 L for the albuterol and ipratropium group and 0.420 L for the albuterol and saline solution group; p = 0.347). By 90 min, the percentage of responders did not differ (88% and 89%, respectively), and the median change in FEV1 was 0.680 L for the group receiving albuterol and ipratropium and 0.650 L for the group receiving albuterol and saline solution (p = 0.693). There were no significant adverse events experienced by patients in either group. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the number of patients requiring additional therapy in the emergency department or hospitalization. We conclude that in this population of inner city asthmatics, we were unable to demonstrate significant additive benefit of nebulized ipratropium bromide to nebulized albuterol.

Acute Disease↗

Comparable bronchodilation with hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA) albuterol and chlorofluorocarbons-11/12 (CFC) albuterol in children with asthma.

This was an open-label, parallel group, randomized, age-stratified, multicenter study designed to compare the safety and efficacy of regular use of albuterol formulated in hydrofluoroalkane-134a (HFA albuterol) and albuterol formulated in chlorofluorocarbons-11/12 (CFC albuterol) in children with asthma. Children age 4-11 years using a short-acting inhaled beta2-agonist for 6 months to manage stable asthma, and with a prestudy forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) of >50% predicted after withholding short-acting inhaled beta2-agonists for at least 6 hr, an increase in FEV1 > or = 12% within 30 min after two puffs of CFC albuterol, and the capability to comply with medication withholding requirements were eligible for study entry. After screening evaluation, patients entered a minimum 7-day run-in period. On study day 1 spirometry and a baseline 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) were performed, pulse and blood pressure were measured, and patients self-administered two puffs of their randomized study drug, either HFA albuterol or CFC albuterol. Serial spirometry was performed over 6 hr after study drug dosing. Pulse and blood pressure were measured just prior to each spirometry and a 12-lead ECG was performed at 60 min postdose. Patients took two puffs of their study drug four times a day for 4 weeks. At study week 4, study day 1 procedures were repeated. Patients maintained a daily diary of morning (A.M.) and evening (P.M.) peak expiratory flow (PEF), daytime asthma symptom scores, nighttime asthma sleep disturbance scores, and study drug use. Demographics and baseline characteristics of the 63 patients randomized to HFA albuterol (33) and CFC albuterol (30) were similar. No significant differences were found between the HFA albuterol and CFC albuterol treatment groups for any of the primary or secondary FEV1 efficacy variables either at study day 1 or study week 4. No significant differences were noted between treatment groups for A.M. and P.M. PEF, individual asthma symptom scores, nighttime asthma sleep disturbance scores, and rescue study drug use over the 4-week study. No significant differences were found between the two treatment groups for change from predose in heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and 12-lead ECG intervals at either study day 1 or study week 4. Adverse event reporting was similar for the two treatment groups. In this study, with regular use of HFA albuterol in children with asthma, there was a similar safety profile and comparable bronchodilator efficacy as with CFC albuterol.

Aerosol Propellants↗

Cumulative dose response study comparing HFA-134a albuterol sulfate and conventional CFC albuterol in patients with asthma.

BACKGROUND: As a result of the pending ban on chlorofluorocarbon production, the non-chlorofluorocarbon propellant 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFA-134a) is being evaluated as a replacement for CFCs in metered-dose inhalers. OBJECTIVES: This cumulative dose response study compared the safety and bronchodilator efficacy of 16 cumulative inhalations of albuterol sulfate in an HFA-134a, CFC-free propellant system (108 microg of albuterol sulfate, equivalent to 90 microg of albuterol base) with that of equivalent doses of albuterol in a conventional CFC propellant system. METHODS: Twenty-two patients with at least a 12-month history of stable asthma, who were currently taken an inhaled beta-adrenergic bronchodilator, and who had a FEV1 between 40% and 80% of predicted, were enrolled in this randomized, modified-blind, two-period crossover study. One, 1, 2, 4, and 8 inhalations of study drug were self-administered at 30-minute intervals, resulting in 16 cumulative inhalations. Pulmonary function and safety measures were assessed after each dosing interval. RESULTS: A significant dose response was found for HFA-134a albuterol sulfate and CFC albuterol with regard to changes in FEV1, serum potassium, heart rate, and blood pressure after 16 cumulative inhalations. No significant differences were demonstrated between HFA-134a albuterol sulfate and CFC albuterol for any FEV1 or safety parameter at any cumulative dose level. No clinically meaningful laboratory or physical examination abnormalities were found with administration of either HFA-134a albuterol sulfate or CFC albuterol. CONCLUSIONS: HFA-134a albuterol sulfate provides bronchodilation comparable to CFC albuterol and has a similar safety profile.

Adult↗

Determination of albuterol sulfate and its related substances in albuterol sulfate inhalation solution, 0.5% by RP-HPLC.

An isocratic reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatographic (RP-HPLC) method has been developed and validated for the determination of albuterol sulfate and six of its related substances in albuterol sulfate inhalation solution, 0.5% (w/v). The separation was achieved using a YMC phenyl column (250 mm x 4.6 mm ID, 5 microm fitted with a direct connect YMC phenyl guard column (20 mm x 4 mm ID) maintained at ambient conditions, and a mobile phase of 25 mM monobasic potassium phosphate (pH 3.0) and methanol (95:5, v/v). The mobile phase flow rate was 1.5 mL/min and the detection wavelength was 225 nm. Albuterol is quantitated versus an external standard. The method was capable of resolving six of the seven known albuterol-related substances. Bis-ether albuterol, a drug substance process related impurity, is retained on the column due to its different hydrophilic character. The related substances are determined by area percent. However, a correction factor of 1.6 is applied for the determination of albuterol aldehyde, a potential impurity and a degradation product, since its molar absorptivity is about 1.6 times that of albuterol. The limits of detection and quantitation for albuterol and six of its related substances ranged between 0.01 and 0.21% of the assay concentration of 0.3 mg/mL as albuterol base. The method was found to be linear for albuterol over the range of 50-150% of the active label claim. The method was also found to be linear for the six related substances over the range 0.05-0.5%. No interferences from the blank, placebo (formulation matrix), related substances or force-degraded placebo samples were observed for the determination of the active or the individual related substances. The method was found to be accurate, precise, linear, specific, sensitive, rugged, robust, and stability-indicating.

Adrenergic beta-Agonists↗

Preferential pulmonary retention of (S)-albuterol after inhalation of racemic albuterol.

The (R)-enantiomer of racemic albuterol produces bronchodilation, whereas the (S)-enantiomer may increase airway reactivity. After oral or intravenous administration of racemic albuterol, the (R)- enantiomer is metabolized several times faster than the (S)-enantiomer; however, enantiomer disposition after inhaling racemic albuterol with a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) is not known. Accordingly, 10 healthy subjects inhaled racemic albuterol with a MDI alone and with a MDI and holding chamber. We measured plasma levels of unchanged (R)- and (S)-albuterol before and up to 4 h after inhalation of racemic albuterol, and determined the unchanged R/S ratio in urine before and at 0.5, 4, 8, and 24 h later. The disposition of albuterol's enantiomers with a MDI and holding chamber was similar to that with a MDI alone. The area under the curve (AUC) of the plasma levels over time was significantly lower for the (S)- than for the (R)-enantiomer-395.5 +/- 141.0 (SE) versus 882.7 +/- 126.4 ng. ml(-)(1). min (p < 0.05)-indicating preferential retention of (S)-albuterol in the lung. The R/S ratio in urine at 0. 5 h after albuterol was > 1, reflecting the higher plasma level of the (R)-enantiomer. In conclusion, preferential retention of the (S)- compared with the (R)-enantiomer in the lung could lead to accumulation of the (S)-enantiomer after long-term use of racemic albuterol.

Administration, Inhalation↗

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of a combination of ipratropium plus albuterol compared with ipratropium alone and albuterol alone in COPD.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To conduct a post hoc pharmacoeconomic evaluation of two double-blind, randomized, prospective, parallel group studies comparing the long-term efficacy and safety of ipratropium combined with albuterol in a single inhalational canister against either bronchodilator agent alone in patients with COPD. PATIENTS: One thousand sixty-seven patients with COPD. METHODS: The dose of each bronchodilator was two puffs four times a day (42 microg of ipratropium bromide, 240 microg of albuterol sulfate). Pulmonary function testing was performed on days 1, 29, 57, and 85 of treatment. Outcomes, health-care resource consumption, and costs were compared for the three treatment groups over the 85-day study period. A total of 1,067 patients were randomized in the two studies (albuterol alone, n = 347; ipratropium alone, n = 362; albuterol plus ipratropium, n = 358). RESULTS: Improvement in FEV1 and area under the FEV1 response-time curve from time 0 to 4 h (FEV1AUC0-4) was significantly greater for the combination of albuterol plus ipratropium than either agent alone on all test days. Compared with albuterol, patients receiving ipratropium and ipratropium plus albuterol experienced significantly fewer COPD exacerbations and patient-days of exacerbation. In addition, the increased frequency of exacerbations observed in the albuterol group was associated with a significant increase in the number of patient hospital days and antibiotic and corticosteroid use. As a result, the total cost of treatment over the study period was significantly less for ipratropium ($156 per patient) and ipratropium plus albuterol ($197 per patient) than for albuterol ($269 per patient). Increased cost-effectiveness, defined as total estimated treatment cost per mean change in FEV1AUC0-4, was observed in both treatment arms containing ipratropium. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of ipratropium in a pharmacologic treatment regimen is associated with a lower rate of exacerbations in COPD. The result is lower total treatment costs and improved cost-effectiveness.

Adult↗

Albuterol aerosol versus albuterol Rotacaps in exercise-induced bronchospasm in children.

The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of albuterol aerosol 180 micrograms and albuterol powder 200 micrograms in the prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm in children. Forty-six patients aged 4-11 years with asthma and exercise-induced bronchospasm were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind, single-dose, three-way crossover study comparing albuterol aerosol, albuterol powder, and placebo. Exercise challenge was performed at the screening visit for qualifying and baseline determinations of pulmonary function and then 15 min after drug administration at each of three visits. Prevention of exercise-induced bronchospasm was assessed by comparing across all treatment groups the percentage change in FEV1 from pre- to postexercise, the percentage of patients protected by treatment, postexercise minimum FEV1, and postexercise change in FEV1. Safety was assessed by observation of clinical adverse events, laboratory tests, physical examination, electrocardiogram and rhythm strips, vital signs, and pulmonary auscultation. Forty-four patients completed the study. Mean postexercise FEV1 decreased 6% from preexercise values when patients were treated with either albuterol formulation; FEV1 decreased 23% when patients were treated with placebo. Exercise-induced bronchospasm was prevented in 95% of patients when treated with albuterol powder, in 91% treated with albuterol aerosol, and in 57% treated with placebo. Patients maintained significantly higher mean minimum FEV1 values after treatment with albuterol powder and albuterol aerosol than when treated with placebo. Treatment with either albuterol formulation produced a significantly smaller decrease in mean FEV1 from pre- to postexercise than treatment with placebo. No drug-related adverse events were reported, and safety assessments were within normal limits.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Administration, Inhalation↗

For COPD a combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate is more effective than albuterol base.

BACKGROUND: A combination metered-dose inhaler aerosol containing ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate has been reported to be more effective than either of its components in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The dose of albuterol sulfate is equal in moles per liter to the dose of albuterol base used in the commercially available metered-dose inhalers. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of the combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate with a commonly prescribed albuterol metered-dose inhaler containing albuterol base alone. METHODS: Investigators at different sites performed a double-blind, 29-day trial involving 357 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Efficacy measurements were taken at 15, 30, and 60 minutes after treatment with study medication and then hourly up to 6 hours on days 1 and 29 of the trial. The primary end point was improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second. Clinical status was followed up and safety monitoring was also performed. RESULTS: The combination produced a significantly greater peak and mean improvement in forced expiratory volume in 1 second over albuterol base alone on both test days. Similar changes were seen with forced vital capacity. Evaluations of clinical status were better for patients receiving combination therapy, and some improvements were statistically significant. The overall incidence of adverse effects was similar in the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSION: We conclude that a combination of ipratropium bromide and albuterol sulfate is more effective at improving pulmonary function than albuterol base alone, with no potentiation of adverse effects.

Administration, Inhalation↗

Clinical comparability of albuterol delivered by the breath-actuated inhaler (Spiros) and albuterol by MDI in patients with asthma.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study compares the efficacy and safety of one and two actuations of albuterol sulfate powder delivered via a breath-actuated, effort-assisted, investigational inhaler (Spiros, Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc) and albuterol delivered via a conventional propellant-driven metered dose inhaler (Ventolin, Glaxo, Inc). DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 5-way crossover study. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients with mild-to-moderate asthma (FEV1 59% predicted) were enrolled and 44 completed the study. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: FEV1 values over 6 hours were analyzed by ANCOVA and the Finney relative potency model. The relative potency of the inhalers (albuterol MDI: albuterol DPI) was 1.132 (90% CI, 0.680 to 2.252) indicating 1.132 actuations of albuterol MDI provided the same bronchodilation as one actuation of albuterol DPI. ANCOVA analyses further indicated that there were no significant differences between the two delivery systems with respect to FEV1, FVC, FEF25-75%, or PEF. Both inhalers had similar effects on serum potassium levels, QTc interval, blood pressure, and heart rate. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with mild-to-moderate asthma in this study, the albuterol DPI was determined to be therapeutically comparable to albuterol MDI in the delivery of one and two actuations of albuterol.

Administration, Inhalation↗

Albuterol HFA is as effective as albuterol CFC in preventing exercise-induced bronchoconstriction.

BACKGROUND: Secondary to the phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the albuterol (Ventolin, GlaxoSmithKline, Uxbridge, Middlesex, United Kingdom) pressurized metered-dose inhaler (MDI) has been formulated in a non-ozone-depleting propellant, hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) 134a. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of albuterol HFA to albuterol CFC and placebo HFA in protecting patients from exercise-induced bronchospasm (EIB). METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover study in patients with documented EIB. Patients (n = 24) aged 18 to 45 years old received albuterol HFA or albuterol CFC, (total dose of 180 microg ex-actuator), or placebo HFA via an MDI, 30 minutes before a standardized exercise challenge. Serial forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) measurements were made 5 minutes before exercise and 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, and 60 minutes postexercise. The primary outcome measure was the maximum percentage fall in FEV1 over the 60 minutes after exercise. RESULTS: The adjusted mean maximum percentage falls in FEV1 postexercise for albuterol HFA and CFC groups were 15.4% and 14.9%, respectively. The two formulations were comparable with a treatment difference of -0.5% (P = 0.848; 95% confidence interval, -5.3 to 4.4%). When compared with the fall in FEV1 for placebo (33.7%), both active treatments demonstrated a significantly smaller fall in FEV1 postexercise (P < 0.001). Safety profiles were similar among the three treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide assurance to prescribers that the formulation of albuterol in the non-ozone-depleting propellant HFA 134a has not affected its efficacy in the treatment of EIB in asthmatic patients. Single doses of albuterol HFA and CFC from an MDI are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety on a microgram per microgram basis.

Administration, Inhalation↗

Combining a positive expiratory pressure device with a metered-dose inhaler reservoir system using chlorofluorocarbon albuterol and hydrofluoroalkane albuterol: effect on dose and particle size distributions.

BACKGROUND: Combining a positive expiratory pressure (PEP) device with inhalation of albuterol via metered dose inhaler (MDI) may improve drug delivery to the lung, but may also affect dose availability. PURPOSE: Determine the effect of interposing a PEP device on dose availability of albuterol via MDI and reservoir with either a chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) or hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) propellant. METHODS: MDI dose availability of CFC albuterol (Proventil) and HFA albuterol (Proventil HFA) using an Aerosol Cloud Enhancer (ACE) reservoir with and without a PEP device (TheraPEP) attached was determined. Drug availability was assessed using an Andersen 8-stage cascade impactor operated at 28.3 +/- 0.5 L/min. The PEP device was inserted between the reverse-firing ACE and the United States Pharmacopeia induction throat. Drug collected on impactor plates was analyzed spectrophotometrically at 276 nm, and the fine particle fraction was determined as the mass of drug < 4.7 microns. RESULTS: With CFC albuterol, total dose and drug mass < 4.7 microns (means and standard deviations) for the MDI-ACE alone were 44.4 +/- 7.7 micrograms and 33.4 +/- 2.2 micrograms, respectively, and for the MDI-ACE with TheraPEP were 50.1 +/- 6.4 micrograms and 39.8 +/- 14.3 micrograms, respectively. With HFA-albuterol sulfate, total drug and drug mass < 4.7 microns for the MDI-ACE alone, expressed as base drug, were 41.7 +/- 4.2 micrograms and 35.2 +/- 6.3 micrograms, respectively, and for the MDI-ACE with TheraPEP were 48.9 +/- 8.0 micrograms and 44.2 +/- 6.2 micrograms, respectively. There was no significant difference in dose availability between the MDI-ACE alone and with the PEP device attached (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p > 0.05), for either CFC or HFA albuterol. CONCLUSION: Interposing the TheraPEP device at the MDI-ACE outlet does not change total dose, drug mass < 4.7 microns, or mass median aerodynamic diameter of MDI albuterol, with either CFC or HFA propellants.

Administration, Inhalation↗

A randomized, clinical trial comparing the efficacy of continuous nebulized albuterol (15 mg) versus continuous nebulized albuterol (15 mg) plus ipratropium bromide (2 mg) for the treatment of acute asthma.

Multiple studies have examined adding nebulized ipratropium bromide to intermittent albuterol for the treatment of acute asthma. Although continuous nebulized treatments in themselves offer benefits; few data exist regarding the efficacy of adding ipratropium bromide to a continuous nebulized system. To compare continuous nebulized albuterol alone (A) vs. albuterol and ipratropium bromide (AI) in adult Emergency Department (ED) patients with acute asthma, a prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial was conducted on a convenience sample of patients (IRB approved). The setting was an urban ED. Consenting patients > 18 years of age with peak expiratory flow rates (PEFR) < 70% predicted, between October 15 and December 28, 1999, were randomized to albuterol (7.5 mg/h) + ipratropium bromide (1.0 mg/h), or albuterol alone via continuous nebulization using the Hope Nebulizer (B&B Technologies Inc., Orangevale, CA) for 2 h. Main outcome measures were changed in mean improvement at 60 and 120 min PEFR compared to baseline (time 0). Secondary measures were admission rates. Data were analyzed using appropriate parametric and non-parametric tests (p < 0.05 statistically significant). Sixty-two patients (30 women) completed enrollment: 32 in (AI) and (30) in (A). Four (A) and 2 (AI) patients are without 120 min data: 3 (A) and 1 (AI) were discharged after 60 min, whereas one each (A) and (AI) worsened and were admitted before 120 min. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in age, sex, predicted or initial PEFR. Thirteen (19.4%) patients were admitted. There was no statistically significant difference in improvement of mean PEFR at 60 min or 120 min compared to baseline, between groups, using repeated measures analysis of variance. Mean improvement in PEFR at 60 min compared to baseline (time 0): (A) = 93.2 L/min (95% confidence interval [CI] 64.5-121.8), (AI) = 86.6 L/min (95% CI 58.9-114.3); mean improvement in PEFR at 120 min compared to baseline (time 0) (A) = 116.5 L/min (95% CI 84.5-148.5), (AI) = 126.4 L/min (95% CI 95.4-157.4). There was no statistically significant difference in admission rates between groups: 5/30 (A) and 8/32 (AI) (p = 0.62). There were no significant differences in mean improvement of PEFR at either 60 or 120 min between ED patients with acute asthma receiving continuous albuterol alone vs. those receiving albuterol in combination with ipratropium bromide.

Adult↗

Albuterol via Turbuhaler versus albuterol via pressurized metered-dose inhaler in asthma.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled albuterol is most commonly self-administered by patients using a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) but patients often have difficulty using the device. Dry powder devices such as the multi-dose, inspiratory flow driven inhaler (Turbuhaler) are often better handled by patients. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 100 micrograms of albuterol delivered by a multi-dose, inspiratory flow driven inhaler (Turbuhaler) to a standard dose (200 micrograms) delivered by a pMDI (Ventolin) in chronic reversible obstructive airways disease. METHOD: In 6 centers, we studied 37 adults [19 men and 18 women, mean age 39 +/- 12 years; mean baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 72 +/- 13% (% predicted)] with stable but symptomatic reversible obstructive airways disease as demonstrated by 15% or greater increase in FEV1 following two puffs (200 micrograms) albuterol by pMDI. The crossover design comprised a 1-week run-in and two 2-week treatment periods separated by a 1-week washout. At the start and end of each treatment period, FEV1 was measured at the clinic. Patients self-administered albuterol 100 micrograms (2 x 50 micrograms) via Turbuhaler or 200 micrograms (2 x 100 micrograms) via pMDI in a double-blind fashion four times daily. Morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF) was noted daily. All non-study bronchodilators were withheld while open-label albuterol pMDI was offered for rescue. RESULTS: Of the 37 patients, 30 used inhaled steroids in constant doses throughout the study, one used inhaled cromoglycate and six used no anti-inflammatory therapy. There was no difference between treatment periods in morning PEF, diurnal fluctuation in PEF, increase in PEF following study drug, baseline FEV1 and FEV1 increase following study drug. Although there was no difference in symptom scores between treatments, the use of rescue beta 2-agonist was slightly but significantly higher during the Turbuhaler treatment period (1.34 versus 1.08 inhalations/ day, P = .04). Compliance with study drug was slightly but significantly lower during the Turbuhaler treatment period (87 versus 95%) such that the total number of beta 2-agonist puffs inhaled (scheduled plus rescue) was similar between treatments. With regard to adverse events, both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the efficacy and tolerability of albuterol 100 micrograms qid inhaled via Turbuhaler is similar to albuterol 200 micrograms qid, inhaled via pMDI in stable reversible obstructive airways disease.

Adult↗

Standard dose of inhaled albuterol significantly increases QT dispersion compared to low dose of albuterol plus ipratropium bromide therapy in moderate to severe acute asthma attacks in children.

BACKGROUND: Beta-2 agonist therapy has previously shown to increase the QT dispersion (QTd) in asthmatic patients and increased QTd has been well documented in association with cardiac arrhythmias and sudden death. However, the data concerning the effect of low doses of beta-2 agonist therapy in combination with the anticholinergic agents to potentiate bronchodilatation on QTd in asthmatic children are limited. The objectives of this study was to investigate the changes on QTd during both the standard dose of nebulized albuterol therapy and low dose nebulized albuterol plus inhaled ipratropium therapyn to assess the potential arrhythmogenic risk of these two treatment strategies in children with acute asthmatic attacks. METHODS: Forty-three children with the diagnosis of moderate to severe acute asthma were enrolled in the study. Standard dose of nebulized albuterol therapy (0.15 mg/kg) were administered to 20 patients (group 1) and low dose of nebulized albuterol (0.075 mg/kg) plus nebulized ipratropium bromide therapy (250 microg/dose) were given to the remaining 23 patients (group 2). Respiratory distress score, peak expiratory flow rate, arterial blood pressure, O2 saturation, serum potassium and urea nitrogen levels were studied and QT interval parameters were measured from the standard 12-lead electrocardiograms at baseline and after treatment. RESULTS: Significant improvement was achieved in respiratory distress score and peak expiratory flow rate after three dose inhalation. No significant difference was observed between the pre and post-treatment values of serum potassium, blood urea nitrogen, O2 saturation and arterial blood pressure values. The evaluation of the corrected QTd (QTcd) showed that while there was no statistical difference in the pre and post-treatment values in group 2 (30.4+/-3.1 msn vs 32.1+/-3.9 msn), QTcd was found to be significantly increased in group 1 after treatment (29.0+/-3 msn vs 40.6+/-5.1 msn, P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: The data of the present study suggest that the increase of the QTd is more prominent with the use of a standard dose of albuterol compared to low dose albuterol plus ipratropium therapy. Therefore, it may be concluded that a low dose of albuterol plus ipratropium bromide therapy may be preferred to avoid rhythm disturbances in asthmatic children.

Acute Disease↗

High serum albuterol levels and tachycardia in adult asthmatics treated with high-dose continuously aerosolized albuterol.

To study the feasibility of using high-dose continuously aerosolized albuterol aerosol in adults, seven adult asthmatic patients were treated eight times with 0.4 mg/kg/h albuterol delivered by continuous nebulization over 4 h. One patient withdrew at 3 h after supraventricular tachycardia developed. This subsided promptly on discontinuing albuterol therapy. Heart rate increases were observed in six of eight treatments and serum albuterol levels at the end of treatment were greater than 25.0 ng/ml in all but one treatment. A mean increase in heart rate of 16.3 percent was observed for the entire group. Of the treatments with elevated (> 25.0 ng/ml) serum albuterol levels, a significant cumulative increase in heart rate was observed with time. A significant improvement of FEV1 was observed (p = 0.0025) with a net increase of 36.8 percent. These data suggest that high-dose continuously aerosolized albuterol treatment in some adult asthmatics can result in markedly elevated serum albuterol levels and potential cardiac stimulation despite spirometric improvement.

Adult↗