Search

Early inhaled corticosteroid treatment improves symptom control and pulmonary function in children with asthma; however, long-term safety data are limited in infants and young children. This study assessed the long-term safety of budesonide inhalation suspension (BIS) in young children with persistent asthma. To continue to provide BIS to children who needed it-prior to US Food and Drug Administration approval-children 8 years of age or younger with mild, moderate, or severe persistent asthma who previously completed a 52-week open-label study of BIS were enrolled in an additional multicenter, open-label study that was to be concluded upon BIS approval. Patients already receiving BIS continued their current regimens. Patients younger than 4 years and those 4 years of age or older not receiving BIS at baseline started with total daily doses of 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively. BIS doses were adjusted throughout the study based on individual response. Adverse events and changes in laboratory parameters, vital signs, and physical examination findings were assessed. Of 198 enrolled patients, 152 (76.8%), 68 (34.3%), and 31 (15.7%) completed 1, 2, and 3 years of BIS treatment (mean daily dose 0.62+/-0.32 mg), respectively. One hundred sixty-six (83.8%) patients experienced an adverse event, of which 8.6% were considered by the investigator to be drug related. Adverse events were those typically occurring in a pediatric asthma population, with respiratory infection (49.0%) and sinusitis (25.3%) occurring at the greatest incidence. Only 2 patients withdrew due to adverse events. Mean changes in laboratory test results and physical examination findings were not clinically important throughout the study. Long-term BIS treatment is well tolerated in young children with persistent asthma, with a safety profile similar to that of short-term administration.

Background: Patients with mild intermittent or mild persistent asthma represent 70% of asthma sufferers. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are the mainstay of treatment for persistent asthma, although many of the early clinical studies of these drugs included only patients with moderate to severe asthma., Objective: This article reviews the literature on the efficacy of budesonide in the treatment of mild persistent asthma, including newly diagnosed ICS-naive patients., Methods: Published data were identified by a MEDLINE search of the English-language literature from 1992 to 2002 using the terms budesonide plus efficacy or safety, both with and without the termsfluticasone or beclomethasone. An AstraZeneca reference database was also used to identify publications from the same period. Controlled, randomized studies that included patients with mild persistent asthma and early-treatment intervention were selected for inclusion., Results: Inhaled budesonide has been used for almost 20 years in the treatment and control of moderate to severe asthma. Studies involving patients with mild persistent asthma have demonstrated significant improvements in peak expiratory flow (PEF) rates (P < 0.01) and forced expiratory volume in I second (P < 0.016) values for adult, adolescent, and pediatric patients treated with budesonide compared with placebo. Budesonide therapy is effective when given once or twice daily via dry powder inhaler or nebulizer, even at a low starting dose (200 microg/d). No significant adverse events have been reported with budesonide within the dose range used to treat mild persistent asthma (200 to 400 microg/d). Significant improvements in PEF rates (P < 0.01) and significant reductions in the risk of exacerbations and the number of days with poorly controlled asthma have been reported for ICS-naive patients treated with budesonide compared with placebo (both P < 0.001). In the primary care setting, mild persistent asthma may be undertreated. Patients with mild persistent asthma benefit significantly from early treatment with budesonide (P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Budesonide is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of mild persistent asthma in adults and children, including many patients whose primary care physicians do not think they require daily ICS treatment.