The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 331:700-705 September 15, 1994 Number 11
NextNext

Effects of Reducing or Discontinuing Inhaled Budesonide in Patients with Mild Asthma
Tari Haahtela, Markku Jarvinen, Tuomo Kava, Kirsti Kiviranta, Sirkka Koskinen, Kaarina Lehtonen, Kurt Nikander, Tore Persson, Olof Selroos, Anssi Sovijarvi, Brita Stenius-Aarniala, Thore Svahn, Ritva Tammivaara, and Lauri A. Laitinen

 

This Article
-Abstract

Commentary
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background In a previous study, we found that two years of treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid, budesonide, was more effective than treatment with an inhaled {beta}2-agonist, terbutaline, in patients with newly diagnosed, generally mild asthma. We continued this study for a third year to investigate whether the steroid dose could be reduced or discontinued and what effect crossover of patients from {beta}2-agonist therapy to corticosteroid therapy would have.

Methods A total of 37 patients treated for two years with inhaled budesonide at a dose of 1200 µg per day were randomly assigned to treatment with 400 µg of budesonide per day (19 patients) or placebo (18 patients) in a double-blind manner. Another 37 patients, who had received terbutaline during the first two years, were crossed over in an open-label manner to treatment with 1200 µg of budesonide per day during the third year.

Results Treatment with the reduced dose of budesonide was sufficiently effective in 74 percent of the patients to maintain bronchial responsiveness at a level similar to that achieved with the higher dose. In contrast, improvement was maintained in only 33 percent of the patients receiving placebo, and the differences in pulmonary function between the steroid and placebo groups were significant (for forced expiratory volume in one second, P = 0.007; for bronchial responsiveness to histamine, P = 0.025; and for peak expiratory flow in the morning, P = 0.040). The condition of patients who were crossed over from terbutaline therapy to treatment with 1200 µg of budesonide per day improved. However, the degree of improvement in these patients appeared to be less than in those who were treated with budesonide at the beginning of the three-year study.

Conclusions Early treatment with inhaled budesonide results in long-lasting control of mild asthma. Maintenance therapy can usually be given at a reduced dose, but discontinuation of treatment is often accompanied by exacerbation of the disease.


In a previous two-year study of patients with generally mild asthma, we found that treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid, budesonide (1200 µg per day), resulted in rapid improvement in symptoms and lung function, whereas similar changes were not observed with the inhaled bronchodilator terbutaline1. We concluded that even in patients with mild asthma, treatment should be initiated with an inhaled corticosteroid such as budesonide.

There is some evidence that the early initiation of treatment with inhaled corticosteroids may provide long-lasting improvement even after asthma therapy has been stopped2,3. We continued our study for a third year to answer the following questions: Would the beneficial effects of treatment with budesonide be maintained with a lower dose (400 µg per day)? How long would the treatment effects last after budesonide was discontinued? What level of treatment efficacy could be obtained when budesonide therapy was started after a delay -- that is, after two years of treatment with terbutaline?

Methods

In our initial, 2-year study we treated patients with newly diagnosed asthma (with symptoms present for less than 12 months) and compared the effects of budesonide (600 µg twice daily) and terbutaline (375 µg twice daily), delivered from a pressurized metered-dose inhaler through a large volume spacer (Nebuhaler, Astra, Sodertalje, Sweden)1. After two years the study was divided into a double-blind arm and an open arm and continued for a third year.

Study Design

            Double-Blind Study Arm

In the double-blind study arm, patients from the previous budesonide group were treated either with budesonide at a reduced dose (200 µg twice daily) or with placebo. An inspiratory-flow-driven, multidose powder inhaler (Turbuhaler, Astra) was chosen for drug delivery to permit the use of a placebo (lactose, 200 µg per dose) without the possible effects of chlorofluorocarbons and lubricants4.

The study was performed as a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial. Five centers participated, and the patients entered the trial at staggered intervals over a 12-month period immediately after completing the previous 2-year treatment period with budesonide. During a four-week run-in period, the patients were switched over to open treatment with budesonide given by a flow-driven inhaler in a dose of 600 µg twice a day. Lung function was evaluated by measuring forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC). Bronchial responsiveness was tested by challenge with six doubling concentrations, or dose steps, of histamine (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32 mg per millimeter) administered by nebulizer. The FEV1 was measured after each 10-breath challenge. The histamine concentration that induced a 15 percent decrease in the FEV1 was called the "provocative concentration" (PC15). Peak expiratory flow (PEF) was measured each morning and evening. Asthma symptoms and supplemental use of a {beta}2-agonist were also assessed. Randomization into two treatment groups was made separately for each center in blocks of four at the end of the run-in period.

During the treatment period, the patients received either budesonide given by a flow-driven inhaler in a dose of 200 µg twice a day or placebo, also given by a flow-driven inhaler. The patients also received terbutaline (500 µg per dose) to be given by a flow-driven inhaler as needed. If, after randomization, asthma control was insufficient with the study medication and supplemental terbutaline, the responsible physician could prescribe oral slow-release theophylline (Theo-Dur, 300 mg twice a day). Patients with severe exacerbations of asthma were allowed to receive oral prednisolone for six days in decreasing doses (30, 25, 20, 15, 10, and 5 mg per day).

            Open Study Arm

The patients entered the open study arm of the trial at staggered intervals over a 12-month period after completing the previous 2-year treatment with terbutaline. The treatment was identical to that used in the budesonide group during the initial two-year study -- that is, budesonide delivered from a metered-dose inhaler at a dose of 600 µg twice a day. No run-in period was included. If supplemental medication was needed, the patients were allowed to take terbutaline from a metered-dose inhaler (250 µg per dose). The use of concomitant antiasthmatic therapy followed the guidelines established for the double-blind study.

Compliance

The use of study medication was checked by the investigator at each visit. No objective method for confirming compliance was available.

Patients

Informed consent was obtained from all patients. The study was approved by the Finnish Medical Board and the local ethics committees.

            Double-Blind Study Arm

At the beginning of the initial two-year study, 50 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with budesonide. Three patients did not fulfill all the inclusion criteria1. During the two-year study, one patient was withdrawn because of insufficient treatment effect and seven were withdrawn for previously reported reasons1. Two patients did not wish to continue, since they deemed themselves "cured." The remaining 37 patients participated in the third year of the study.

            Open Study Arm

Initially, 53 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with terbutaline. Three patients did not fulfill all the inclusion criteria. Ten patients were withdrawn during the two-year study because of insufficient treatment effect, and 3 were withdrawn for other reasons. The remaining 37 patients continued in the open study with budesonide for the third year.

Similarity of the Groups

When the three newly formed treatment groups were compared with the use of patient data obtained at the start of the two-year study, the groups were found to be similar in most respects (Table 1). However, the placebo group in the double-blind study had lower PC15 values than the two other groups. In the open study, a larger proportion of nonatopic patients had been withdrawn during the two-year study, so that the group subsequently had relatively more patients with atopy (86 percent) than the two groups in the double-blind study (68 percent in the group receiving budesonide and 67 percent in the group receiving placebo) (Table 1).

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Characteristics of the Treatment Groups Assessed at the Start of the Initial Two-Year Study.

 
Recording Outcomes

The methods used to record outcomes were similar to those used in the preceding study1 and will be described here briefly. During the run-in period (double-blind study only), the first 12 weeks, and the last 4 weeks of the third year, the patients recorded their PEF values each morning and evening. They also recorded their asthma symptoms every day, assigning a single score of 0 (no symptoms) to 10 (severe symptoms) for each 24-hour period. The use of supplemental {beta}2-agonist medication and adverse reactions were also recorded.

The assessments performed at the clinic at the start and end of the 4-week run-in period (double-blind study only) and then after 6, 12, 28, 44, and 48 weeks of treatment included spirometry, a test for bronchial responsiveness, and checks of the patients' diaries.

Statistical Analysis

For the measurement of the three variables reflecting lung function -- FVC, FEV1 and PC15 -- the time of randomization was used as the point of reference in the double-blind study, whereas the start of treatment was used as the point of reference in the open study. In the analyses, logarithmic values for PC15 were used and the result was expressed as dose steps (i.e., step 0 equaled 1 mg of histamine diphosphate per milliliter; step 1, 2 mg per milliliter; step 2, 4 mg per milliliter; and so on). The values for the four variables recorded in the diaries -- the morning PEF, the evening PEF, the asthma score, and the number of puffs of supplemental {beta}2-agonist -- were first reduced to averages over the four-week run-in period (double-blind study only) and over the first week, the sixth week, and the last month. The average for the run-in period was used as the reference value in the double-blind study, and the average for the last four weeks preceding the start of the new treatment was used in the open study.

All seven variables were analyzed with respect to change from the reference value. Analyses between and within groups were performed by t-tests with averages for the last month (diary data) or the last measurement (FVC, FEV1, and PC15) of the treatment period. P values below 0.05 were considered to indicate statistical significance. All tests were two-tailed.

Results

Lung Function and Symptoms

            Double-Blind Study Arm

FVC values did not change significantly during the third year or differ significantly between the groups (Table 2). The FEV1 and PC15 values did not change significantly in the budesonide group, but in the placebo group the FEV1 fell by an average of 0.25 liter (P = 0.010) and PC15 by 1.5 dose steps (P = 0.037). The differences in the changes in FEV1 and PC15 values between the groups were significant (P = 0.007 and P = 0.025, respectively) (Table 2 and Figure 1). Bronchial responsiveness worsened during the third year in 5 of the 19 patients in the budesonide group (26 percent) and 12 of the 18 patients in the placebo group (67 percent).

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Changes in Lung Function and Diary-Card Data during the Third Year of the Study.

 

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Mean (±SE) PC as a Measure of Bronchial Responsiveness.

The PC15 dose steps 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 represent histamine concentrations of 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32 mg per milliliter, respectively. The three groups of patients were treated as follows: double-blind budesonide for three years (solid line), double-blind budesonide for two years followed by double-blind placebo for one year (dotted line), and double-blind terbutaline for two years followed by open-label budesonide for one year (dotted-and-dashed line). The first two groups were treated as one until the beginning of the third year.

 
Morning and evening PEF values did not change significantly in the budesonide group, but fell significantly in the placebo group (P<0.001 and P = 0.017, respectively) (Table 2 and Figure 2A). In the placebo group the average decrease in PEF (from base line) was 22 liters per minute in the morning and 13 liters per minute in the evening. There was a significant difference between the two groups with respect to the changes in morning PEF values (P = 0.040). The asthma-symptom score increased significantly in the placebo group (P = 0.037) (Table 2 and Figure 2B). The use of supplemental terbutaline did not change significantly in the two groups.


View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Day-to-Day Mean PEF (Panel A) and Asthma-Symptom Score (Panel B).

The PEF was measured in the morning. The range of possible asthma scores was 0 to 10. The groups of patients were treated as follows: double-blind budesonide for three years (thick solid line), double-blind budesonide for two years followed by double-blind placebo for one year (dotted line), and double-blind terbutaline for two years followed by open-label budesonide for one year (thin solid line).

 
            Open Study Arm

The FVC and FEV1 values did not change significantly during the third year, but the improvement in PC15 approached significance (P = 0.05) (Table 2).

Morning PEF values increased by an average of 15 liters per minute (P = 0.005). An average increase in the evening PEF of 6 liters per minute was not significant (P = 0.11) (Table 2 and Figure 2A). The asthma-symptom score fell significantly (P = 0.009) (Table 2 and Figure 2B), as did the use of supplemental terbutaline (P = 0.009).

Comparison of Early and Late Therapy with Budesonide

We compared the changes observed in the group treated with budesonide from the beginning and the changes in the group treated with budesonide after two years of terbutaline therapy. The changes in the measures of treatment efficacy were calculated for the 1st week, the 6th week, and the 12th month after the start of treatment with budesonide. There was a greater degree of improvement in all lung-function measures in the patients treated initially with budesonide (Table 3). A similar trend was seen for the asthma-symptom score and for the use of supplemental terbutaline.

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 3. Comparison of Improvements in Patients Treated with Budesonide as First-Line Therapy within One Year of the Diagnosis of Asthma and Patients Treated More Than Two Years after Diagnosis.

 
Withdrawal, Extra Medication, and Side Effects

A 60-minute cosyntropin test7 to examine the adrenocortical response was carried out in 42 of the 50 patients who had been receiving budesonide for two years and were eligible for the double-blind study. All patients fulfilled the criteria for a normal response and had a mean increase in plasma cortisol concentrations of 369 nmol per liter (from 399 to 768 nmol per liter; reference value, >150 nmol per liter) at 30 minutes and of 542 nmol per liter (from 399 to 941 nmol per liter) at 60 minutes.

            Double-Blind Study Arm

During the third year three patients were withdrawn from the budesonide group, two because of insufficient treatment effect (after 98 and 161 treatment days) and one because of pregnancy (after 219 days). Three patients were also withdrawn from the placebo group, all because of insufficient treatment effect (after 50 days, 121 days, and nearly a year). Five of 19 patients treated with budesonide reported throat irritation, as compared with 1 of 18 in the placebo group. No cases of oropharyngeal candidiasis or hoarseness occurred. Nine courses of oral prednisolone were given to four patients in the budesonide group, and two of them used two and three courses soon after the dose of budesonide was reduced. Six patients in the placebo group used eight courses of prednisolone. Theophylline was added to the treatment regimen of three patients in the placebo group (a total of 218 treatment days), but to none in the budesonide group.

            Open Study Arm

One patient was withdrawn from the open study because of noncompliance. None of the patients dropped out because of adverse effects. Twelve courses of oral prednisolone were given to eight patients. Theophylline was added to the treatment regimen of five patients.

Discussion

During the third year of our study, one group of patients who had previously received 1200 µg of budesonide per day received a reduced dose, 400 microg. Measures of lung function and clinical variables recorded in the patients' diaries remained essentially unchanged after the dose of budesonide was reduced. A slight decrease in PEF values was observed at the beginning of the third year, but this was not accompanied by significant changes in other measures of lung function or by an increase in symptoms. The PEF values improved again toward the end of the study year. In a few patients early deterioration of the clinical condition was observed, and 2 of the 19 patients had to be withdrawn during the year because of insufficient treatment effect. Nevertheless, it is obvious that in the majority of patients the dose of budesonide can be reduced without important deterioration of lung function.

In the parallel double-blind placebo group, all variables deteriorated during the third year. There seemed to be a gradual decline of lung function, which became more pronounced toward the end of the year. Bronchial responsiveness worsened -- the PC15 value decreased by an average of 1.5 dose steps -- but still remained 1.2 steps above the base-line value observed at the start of the three-year study. At the beginning of the three-year study, the placebo group had worse bronchial reactivity than the other two groups, which indicates more severe asthma. However, the improvements in lung function were maintained in 6 of the 18 patients in the placebo group, which suggests that treatment with an inhaled steroid may be discontinued in some patients. Unfortunately, we have no means of identifying those whose condition will or will not deteriorate when treatment is discontinued.

In a previous study, when budesonide was stopped after only six weeks of treatment, the severity of symptoms and lung function reverted rapidly to base-line values8. The beneficial effect remained for three months when treatment had continued for one year3. In both studies, patients had chronic asthma of at least moderate severity. When patients with newly diagnosed asthma were treated with 400 µg per day of budesonide for one year, and treatment was then discontinued, mean bronchial responsiveness deteriorated during the following six months; however, the mean remained better than that recorded before therapy9.

The patients in our open study arm, who had inhaled 750 µg of terbutaline per day for two years and then 1200 µg of budesonide per day during the third year, had a significant decrease in asthma symptoms and in the use of supplemental terbutaline, and an improvement in morning PEF values during treatment with budesonide. When the responses were compared with those in the group treated with budesonide from the outset, it was observed that delayed treatment with budesonide resulted in consistently poorer responses. This trend was statistically significant at all time points for increases in morning PEF values from base line.

Before the start of the third year, 16 of 53 patients in the original terbutaline group had been withdrawn for various reasons. When these 16 patients were compared with the 37 patients who continued the study, their age, duration of asthma, blood eosinophil count, spirometric values, and PC values were similar. The frequency of atopy was different: it was 50 percent in the group that withdrew and 86 percent in those who continued. This does not explain the differences in the response to budesonide treatment, since patients with atopy would be expected to respond as favorably as those without atopy to treatment with an inhaled steroid10. Some of the patients who withdrew had obviously more severe asthma than those who were able to continue receiving terbutaline. This could have resulted in a selection bias affecting the response to steroid therapy. On the other hand, the remaining patients in the open study group and the group treated with budesonide from the beginning had similar base-line values for lung function (Table 1) and, on these grounds, as much room for improvement.

It has been suggested that bronchodilators may mask the underlying disease and the ongoing inflammatory process by temporarily relieving symptoms while allowing slow deterioration in lung function to proceed11,12. The poorer response to delayed steroid treatment that we observed is in line with this idea, but further confirmation is needed. Further studies are also needed to uncover the underlying mechanisms.

From our three-year study, we reach the following general conclusions. It seems possible to obtain long-term control of asthma with early treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid (in this case, budesonide). Control of the disease in most patients can be maintained with a lower dose of the corticosteroid than was initially needed to normalize lung function. Decreasing the dose should reduce the risk of side effects. If treatment is discontinued, patients should be monitored carefully, since lung function will often deteriorate. In addition, we found some indication that delays in initiating inhaled corticosteroid therapy may lead to an impaired response. This observation should be confirmed before clinical conclusions are drawn.


Source Information

From Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland (T.H., K.K., A.S., B.S.-A., L.A.L.); Kanta-Hame Central Hospital, Hameenlinna, Finland (M.J.); Pohjois-Karjala Central Hospital, Joensuu, Finland (T.K.); Kiljava Hospital, Kiljava, Finland (S.K., R.T.); Etela-Saimaa Central Hospital, Lappeenranta, Finland (K.L.); and Astra Draco AB, Lund, Sweden (K.N., T.P., O.S., T.S.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Haahtela at the Department of Allergic Diseases, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Meilahdentie 2, SF-00250 Helsinki, Finland.

References

  1. Haahtela T, Jarvinen M, Kava T, et al. Comparison of a {beta}2-agonist, terbutaline, with an inhaled corticosteroid, budesonide, in newly detected asthma. N Engl J Med 1991;325:388-392. [Abstract]
  2. Juniper EF, Kline PA, Vanzieleghem MA, Ramsdale EH, O'Byrne PM, Hargreave FE. Effect of long-term treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid (budesonide) on airway hyperresponsiveness and clinical asthma in nonsteroid-dependent asthmatics. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;142:832-836. [Medline]
  3. Juniper EF, Kline PA, Vanzieleghem MA, Hargreave FE. Reduction of budesonide after a year of increased use: a randomized controlled trial to evaluate whether improvements in airway responsiveness and clinical asthma are maintained. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1991;87:483-489. [CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Engel T, Heinig JH, Malling H-J, Scharling B, Nikander K, Madsen F. Clinical comparison of inhaled budesonide delivered either via pressurized metered dose inhaler or Turbuhaler. Allergy 1989;44:220-225. [Medline]
  5. Viljanen AA, Halttunen PK, Kreus K-E, Viljanen BC. Spirometric studies in non-smoking, healthy adults. Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl 1982;159:5-20. [Medline]
  6. Gregg I, Nunn AJ. Peak expiratory flow in normal subjects. BMJ 1973;3:282-284.
  7. Maynard DE, Folk RL, Riley TR, Wieland RG, Gwinup G, Hamwi GJ. A rapid test for adrenocortical insufficiency. Ann Intern Med 1966;64:552-556.
  8. Vathenen AS, Knox AJ, Wisniewski A, Tattersfield AE. Time course of change in bronchial reactivity with an inhaled corticosteroid in asthma. Am Rev Respir Dis 1991;143:1317-1321. [Medline]
  9. Osterman K, Carlholm M, Erlandsson G, et al. Long-term treatment with inhaled budesonide (dry powder) 400 µg daily in newly detected asthmatics. Eur Respir J 1993;6:Suppl 17:119s-119s.abstract 
  10. Brogden RN. Factors which may affect the response to inhaled steroids; side effects. In: Clark TJH, ed. Steroids in asthma: a reappraisal in the light of inhalation therapy. Auckland, New Zealand: ADIS Press, 1983:154-65.
  11. Page C, Costello J. Controversies in respiratory medicine: regular inhaled beta-agonists -- clear clinical benefit or a hazard to health? Why beta-agonists should not be used regularly. Respir Med 1992;86:477-479. [Medline]
  12. Taylor DR, Sears MR, Herbison GP, et al. Regular inhaled beta agonist in asthma: effects on exacerbations and lung function. Thorax 1993;48:134-138. [Abstract]

 

This Article
-Abstract

Commentary
-Letters

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation

Related Letters:

Inhaled Budesonide for Mild Asthma
Geddes D. M., König P., Haahtela T., Laitinen L. A., Drazen J. M., Israel E.
Extract | Full Text  
N Engl J Med 1995; 332:683-684, Mar 9, 1995. Correspondence

This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.