首页> 外文期刊>Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery >Inhaled lidocaine for the treatment of asthma: lack of efficacy in two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical studies.
【24h】

Inhaled lidocaine for the treatment of asthma: lack of efficacy in two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical studies.

机译:吸入利多卡因治疗哮喘:两项两项随机,安慰剂对照的双盲临床研究均缺乏疗效。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Asthma with severe or persistent exacerbations is treated with chronic oral corticosteroids (OCS), such as prednisone. Although efficacious, OCS treatment is often associated with side effects; thus, corticosteroid-sparing treatments are needed. METHODS: We conducted two double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical studies assessing lidocaine solution for inhalation (LSI; 40 mg twice daily; eFlow((R)) nebulizer) to treat asthma. Study 1-Mild/Moderate included 154 patients with mild-moderate asthma [forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) >/=60% predicted, and >/=12% improvement in FEV(1) (L) after short-acting, inhaled beta-agonist; no OCS or inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in previous month] and evaluated whether FEV(1) improved after 12 weeks of treatment. Study 2-OCS included 114 patients with more severe asthma (FEV(1) 35-85% of predicted values, treatment with OCS for >/=6 months, average daily dose between 5 and 70 mg prednisone or equivalent, stable >/=30 days) and evaluated whether 20 weeks of treatment had a corticosteroid-sparing effect, measured as reduced need for OCS. RESULTS: LSI did not improve pulmonary function in Study 1-Mild/Moderate, and did not have a corticosteroid-sparing effect in Study 2-OCS, when compared with placebo. Thus, the primary efficacy endpoints were not met. Significant improvements were not observed for asthma symptom scores, morning and evening peak expiratory flow values, FEV(1) % predicted, proportion of patients with asthma instability, and asthma quality-of-life scores at week 12 (Study 1-Mild/Moderate) or week 20 (Study 2-OCS). LSI was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that lidocaine solution for inhalation is not a useful treatment for asthma; it did not improve pulmonary function and did not have a corticosteroid-sparing effect.
机译:背景:患有严重或持续发作的哮喘患者可使用强的松等慢性口服皮质类固醇(OCS)治疗。尽管有效,但OCS治疗通常与副作用相关;因此,需要保留皮质类固醇激素治疗。方法:我们进行了两项双盲,安慰剂对照的临床研究,评估了利多卡因溶液的吸入性吸入(LSI; 40 mg每天两次; eFlow(R)雾化器)治疗哮喘。研究1-轻度/中度纳入154例轻度-中度哮喘患者[一秒内呼气量(FEV(1))> / = 60%预计,FEV(1)改善> / = 12%(L)短效吸入性β-激动剂;前一个月没有OCS或吸入皮质类固醇(ICS)],并评估了治疗12周后FEV(1)是否有所改善。研究2-OCS包括114例患有更严重哮喘的患者(FEV(1)预测值的35-85%,OCS治疗> / = 6个月,日平均泼尼松剂量在5到70 mg或同等水平,稳定> / = 30天),并评估了20周的治疗是否具有皮质类固醇保护作用(以减少对OCS的需要量度)。结果:与安慰剂相比,在研究1-轻度/中度研究中LSI并未改善肺功能,在研究2-OCS中没有皮质激素保留作用。因此,主要功效终点未达到。在第12周,哮喘症状评分,早晨和傍晚的呼气峰流量,FEV(1)%预测值,哮喘不稳定患者的比例以及哮喘的生活质量评分未见明显改善(研究1轻度/中度) )或第20周(研究2-OCS)。 LSI的容忍度很高。结论:这些结果表明吸入利多卡因溶液不是治疗哮喘的有效方法。它没有改善肺功能,也没有皮质类固醇保护作用。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号