help button home button
AJRCCM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Published ahead of print on September 22, 2006, doi:10.1164/rccm.200603-416OC
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Online Supplement
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
200603-416OCv1
175/3/235    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine Vol 175. pp. 235-242, (2007)
© 2007 American Thoracic Society
doi: 10.1164/rccm.200603-416OC

Original Article

Clinical Trial of Low-Dose Theophylline and Montelukast in Patients with Poorly Controlled Asthma

The American Lung Association Asthma Clinical Research Centers*

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Robert A. Wise, M.D., Johns Hopkins Asthma & Allergy Center, 5501 Hopkins Bayview Circle, Baltimore, MD 21224. E-mail: rwise{at}jhmi.edu

Background: Asthma treatment guidelines recommend addition of controller medications for patients with poorly controlled asthma. We compared 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 beta-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.

Key Words: antiasthmatic agents • bronchodilator agents • clinical trial • multicenter studies


AT A GLANCE COMMENTARY

Scientific Knowledge on the Subject
Low-dose theophylline and montelukast are effective antiinflammatory agents that improve lung function, but their role in the treatment of poorly controlled asthma is not known.

What This Study Adds to the Field
This clinical trial showed that low-dose theophylline and montelukast do not improve asthma control, but that low-dose theophylline was beneficial in those patients who had not been prescribed inhaled corticosteroids.

 



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ERRHome page
M. Gaga, E. Zervas, and P. Chanez
Update on severe asthma: what we know and what we need
Eur. Respir. Rev., June 1, 2009; 18(112): 58 - 65.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
The American Lung Association Asthma Clinical Rese
Efficacy of Esomeprazole for Treatment of Poorly Controlled Asthma
N. Engl. J. Med., April 9, 2009; 360(15): 1487 - 1499.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
A. A. Litonjua, J. Lasky-Su, K. Schneiter, K. G. Tantisira, R. Lazarus, B. Klanderman, J. J. Lima, C. G. Irvin, S. P. Peters, J. P. Hanrahan, et al.
ARG1 Is a Novel Bronchodilator Response Gene: Screening and Replication in Four Asthma Cohorts
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., October 1, 2008; 178(7): 688 - 694.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
W. C. Moore
Update in Asthma 2007
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., May 15, 2008; 177(10): 1068 - 1073.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
N. A. Hanania
Targeting Airway Inflammation in Asthma: Current and Future Therapies
Chest, April 1, 2008; 133(4): 989 - 998.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
E. D. Bateman, S. S. Hurd, P. J. Barnes, J. Bousquet, J. M. Drazen, M. FitzGerald, P. Gibson, K. Ohta, P. O'Byrne, S. E. Pedersen, et al.
Global strategy for asthma management and prevention: GINA executive summary
Eur. Respir. J., January 1, 2008; 31(1): 143 - 178.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
J. J. Shannon, C. D. Catrambone, and L. Coover
Targeting Improvements in Asthma Morbidity in Chicago: A 10-Year Retrospective of Community Action
Chest, November 1, 2007; 132(5_suppl): 866S - 873S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc Am Thorac SocHome page
M. Castro
Placebo versus Best-Available-Therapy Control Group in Clinical Trials for Pharmacologic Therapies: Which Is Better?
Proceedings of the ATS, October 1, 2007; 4(7): 570 - 573.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
C. G. Irvin, D. A. Kaminsky, N. R. Anthonisen, M. Castro, N. A. Hanania, J. T. Holbrook, J. J. Lima, R. A. Wise, and for the American Lung Association Asthma Clinical

Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., September 1, 2007; 176(5): 521 - 522.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
A. Tai and S. Ranganathan
Optimizing Medications for Poorly Controlled Asthma
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., September 1, 2007; 176(5): 520 - 521.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
H. Allayee, J. Hartiala, W. Lee, M. Mehrabian, C. G. Irvin, D. V. Conti, and J. J. Lima
The Effect of Montelukast and Low-Dose Theophylline on Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Asthmatics
Chest, September 1, 2007; 132(3): 868 - 874.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Evid. Based Med.Home page
F. Thien
Once daily oral controller therapy with low dose theophylline or montelukast was not effective in poorly controlled asthma
Evid. Based Med., August 1, 2007; 12(4): 115 - 115.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
G. P. Currie, R. Alluri, and A. Nair
Montelukast and Theophylline: No Use or Some Use in Persistent Asthma?
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., May 15, 2007; 175(10): 1094 - 1094.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
C. G. Irvin, D. A. Kaminsky, N. R. Anthonisen, M. Castro, N. A. Hanania, J. T. Holbrook, J. J. Lima, and R. A. Wise
Montelukast and Theophylline: No Use or Some Use in Persistent Asthma?
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., May 15, 2007; 175(10): 1094a - 1095.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
N. Barnes
Spoilt for Choice?
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., February 1, 2007; 175(3): 208 - 209.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proc. Am. Thorac. Soc. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
Copyright © 2007 American Thoracic Society 		  Registrer for the conference