Objective: To compare a step-down approach in well-controlled asthma patients, as recommended by treatment guidelines, from fluticasone propionate 250 microg twice daily (FP250 BID), or equivalent, to ciclesonide 160 microg once daily (CIC160 OD) with continued FP250 BID treatment.
Research design and methods: Patients with well-controlled asthma prior to study entry were included in two identical, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group studies. After a 2-week run-in period with FP250 BID, patients were randomized to CIC160 OD (n = 58) or FP250 BID (n = 53) for 12 weeks. Primary endpoints were percentage of days with asthma control, asthma symptom-free days, rescue medication-free days and nocturnal awakening-free days. Secondary endpoints included lung function variables, asthma symptom scores, rescue medication use and asthma exacerbations. Safety variables were also recorded.
Results: Patients had >or= 97% of days with asthma control, 98% asthma symptom-free days and 100% of days free from rescue medication use and nocturnal awakenings in both treatment groups (median values). There were no significant between-treatment differences for any of the primary or secondary efficacy variables. Overall, 42 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in the CIC160 OD group and 49 TEAEs were reported in the FP250 BID group. There were no clinically relevant changes from baseline in the safety variables in either treatment group.
Conclusions: Patients well controlled on FP250 BID, or equivalent, who were stepped down to CIC160 OD, maintained similar asthma control compared with patients who received continued treatment standardized to FP250 BID.