Comparison of once- and twice-daily dosing of fluticasone propionate 200 micrograms per day administered by diskus device in patients with asthma treated with or without inhaled corticosteroids.

BACKGROUND: There are limited published data regarding the efficacy of once- versus twice-daily administration of flutica-sone propionate.

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of fluticasone propionate powder 200 microg/d administered as a once- or twice-daily dosage regimen in patients who were currently being treated with bronchodilators only (BD patients) and in patients who required inhaled corticosteroids for maintenance treatment of asthma (ICS patients).

METHODS: Five hundred seventy patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following inhaled treatments through the Diskus device (Glaxo Wellcome, Research Triangle Park, NC) for 12 weeks: fluticasone propionate 100 microg twice daily (FP100BID) or 200 microg once daily (FP200QD) or placebo.

RESULTS: BD patients treated with FP100BID, FP200QD, and placebo had mean increases in FEV(1) from baseline to end point of 0. 49 L, 0.37 L, and 0.21 L, respectively (P <.001, FP100BID vs placebo; P =.05, FP200QD vs placebo). ICS patients treated with FP100BID and FP200QD had mean increases in FEV(1) of 0.27 L and 0.11 L, respectively, compared with a decrease in FEV(1) of -0.08 L with placebo (P <.001, FP100BID vs placebo; P =.023, FP200QD vs placebo). BD patients treated with FP100BID and FP200QD had mean increases in morning peak expiratory flow from baseline to end point of 31 L/min and 27 L/min, respectively, compared with a 1 L/min increase in patients treated with placebo. ICS patients treated with FP100BID had a mean increase in morning peak expiratory flow (from baseline to end point) of 18 L/min compared with mean decreases of -3 L/min and -12 L/min in the FP200QD and placebo groups, respectively. More patients were withdrawn from placebo (26% and 48%, in BD and ICS patients, respectively) than from fluticasone propionate (7%-9% [BID-QD] and 18%-32% [BID-QD], in BD and ICS patients, respectively) because of failure to meet predetermined asthma stability criteria.

CONCLUSION: The efficacies of FP100BID and FP200QD were comparable with regard to improvement in pulmonary function and asthma stability in BD patients. In ICS patients, asthma control was maintained with FP200QD, whereas FP100BID provided greater improvements in pulmonary function and asthma stability.