Fenoterol hydrobromide delivered via HFA-MDI or CFC-MDI in patients with asthma: A safety and efficacy comparison

Abstract

The main objective of the study was to compare the long-term safety and tolerability of fenoterol hydrobromide delivered using a metered-dose inhaler formulated with the alternative propellant, hydrofluoroalkane 134a (HFA-MDI), with delivery using the currently available chlorofluorocarbon MDI (CFC-MDI; Berotec® 100). A further objective was to compare the efficacy of fenoterol HFA-MDI with fenoterol CFC-MDI, using the pulmonary function parameters of forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and peak expiratory flow (PEF). Following a 2-week run-in phase, a 12-week, double-blind parallel group comparison was undertaken in 290 patients randomized on a 2:1 basis to two puffs of 100 μg fenoterol four times a day (HFA-MDI=197 patients; CFC-MDI=93 patients). A total of 236 patients in this multi-centre study completed the trial as planned. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar in both groups (29·9% of HFA-MDI patients and 28% of CFC-MDI patients). Reports of respiratory disorder AEs were also comparable (21·8% HFA-MDI; 22·6% CFC-MDI). End of study laboratory tests, ECG, pulse, blood pressure and physical examination showed no significant differences from pre-study baselines in either group and both treatments appeared to be well tolerated. Pre-dose FEV1 measurements taken at the three clinic visits were constant and increase in FEV1 at 5 and 30 min post-dose demonstrated equivalent efficacy for the two formulations. No difference between the two groups was observed in PEF or in the use of rescue medication. We conclude from these findings that the long-term safety and efficacy profile of fenoterol HFA-MDI is comparable to that of the fenoterol CFC-MDI.