Skip to main content

Table 3 Mean difference in FEV1% predicted

From: A comparison of tiotropium, long-acting β2-agonists and leukotriene receptor antagonists on lung function and exacerbations in paediatric patients with asthma

Drug

Age, years

na

Mean difference FEV1, % predicted (95% CI) active drug vs placebo

LABA added to ICS versus ICS, FEV1 response (Cochrane analysis: Chauhan 2015)

534

2.99 (0.86, 5.11)b

Formoterol added to ICS versus ICS

 Akpinarli 1999

 Formoterol 12 μg BID add-on to ICS 400–800 μg/day

6–14

32

2.00 (−24.10, 28.10)b

Salmeterol added to beclomethasone dipropionate versus beclomethasone dipropionate

 Verberne 1998

 Salmeterol/beclomethasone dipropionate 50/200 μg BID vs beclomethasone dipropionate 200 μg BID

6–16

117

3.08 (−0.49, 6.65)b

 Meijer 1995

 Salmeterol 50 μg BID + beclomethasone dipropionate 250 μg BID

7–15

39

3.60 (−2.94, 10.14)b

Salmeterol added to fluticasone propionate versus fluticasone propionate

 Carroll 2010

 Fluticasone/salmeterol 100/50 BID vs fluticasone 100 μg BID

7–18

37

5.20 (−1.04, 11.44)b

 Lenney 2013

 Fluticasone propionate/salmeterol 100/50 μg BID vs fluticasone propionate 100 μg BID

6–14

21

15.42 (1.51, 29.33)b

 Teper 2005

 Fluticasone/salmeterol 125/25 μg BID vs fluticasone 125 μg BID

6–14

82

−0.40 (−5.03, 4.23)b

Salmeterol added to ICS versus ICS

 Russell 1995

 Salmeterol 50 μg BID add-on to ICS 400–2400 μg/day

4–16

206

3.40 (−1.54, 8.34)b

Tiotropium in moderate asthma

 Tiotropium 5 μg

 Add-on to 400–800 μg/day budesonide (200–800 μg/day for patients aged 12–14 years)

12–17

268

268

Trough: 3.205 (0.209, 6.201)

Peak: 4.492 (1.700, 7.285)

 Tiotropium 2.5 μg

 Add-on to 400–800 μg/day budesonide (200–800 μg/day for patients aged 12–14 years)

12–17

256

257

Trough: 2.850 (−0.229, 5.929)

Peak: 4.066 (1.208, 6.924)

 Tiotropium 5 μg

 Add-on to 200–400 μg budesonide

6–11

260

260

Trough: 4.439 (1.207, 7.671)

Peak: 6.521 (3.717, 9.325)

 Tiotropium 2.5 μg

 Add-on to 200–400 μg budesonide

6–11

257

257

Trough: 5.048 (1.811, 8.285)

Peak: 7.698 (4.892, 10.505)

Tiotropium in severe asthma

 Tiotropium 5 μg

 Add-on to high-dose ICSc + ≥1 controller or medium-dose ICSd + ≥2 controllers

12–17

262

262

Trough: 0.827 (−2.354, 4.008)

Peak: 1.643 (−1.252, 4.539)

 Tiotropium 2.5 μg

 Add-on to high-dose ICSc + ≥1 controller or medium-dose ICSd + ≥2 controllers

12–17

258

258

Trough: 3.283 (0.075, 6.491)

Peak: 3.106 (0.188, 6.024)

 Tiotropium 5 μg

 Add-on to > 400 μg budesonide + ≥1 controller or 200–400 μg budesonide + ≥2 controllers

6–11

258

258

Trough: 3.848 (0.576, 7.120)

Peak: 6.325 (3.264, 9.385)

 Tiotropium 2.5 μg

 Add-on to > 400 μg budesonide + ≥1 controller or 200–400 μg budesonide + ≥2 controllers

6–11

265

265

Trough: 2.350 (−0.909, 5.609)

Peak: 3.587 (0.540, 6.634)

Montelukast

 Castro-Rodriguez 2010

 Meta-analysis: Montelukast 5 mg QD Add-on to 200–800 μg/day budesonide

5–18

188a

0.09 (−0.07, 0.25)b

 Simons 2001

 Montelukast 5 mg QD + budesonide 200 μg BID vs budesonide 200 μg BID

6–14

279

1.3 (− 0.1, 2.7)b

 Miraglia del Giudice 2007

 Montelukast 5 μg QD + budesonide 200 μg BID vs budesonide 200 μg BID

7–11

48

10.8 (NR)b

 Zhao 2015

 Network meta-analysis:

 Montelukast 4–10 mg QD add-on to 100–200 μg/day budesonide

≤18

NR

 

 Stelmach 2007

 Montelukast 5–10 μg QD + 200 μg budesonide BID vs 200 μg budesonide BID

6–18

76

2.6 (NR)b

 Stelmach 2015

 Montelukast 5 mg QD add-on to 200–600 μg budesonidee

6–14

76

2.5 (NR)b,f

  1. BID twice daily, CI confidence interval, FEV1 forced expiratory volume in 1 s, ICS inhaled corticosteroid, LABA long-acting β2-agonist, NR not reported, QD once daily
  2. aTotal n number for the treatment arms being compared. bTime of measurement relevant to dosing (peak/trough) not specified. cHigh-dose ICS defined as > 400 μg budesonide (aged 12–14 years)/800–1600 μg budesonide (aged 15–17 years). dMedium-dose ICS defined as 200–400 μg budesonide (aged 12–14 years)/400–800 μg budesonide (aged 15–17 years). eICS dose was adjusted during the course of this study. fChange from placebo was not significantly different (P = 0.229)