High-dose N-acetylcysteine in the prevention of COPD exacerbations: Rationale and design of the PANTHEON study

19Citations
Citations of this article
52Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by persistent airflow limitation; from a pathophysiological point of view it involves many components, including mucus hypersecretion, oxidative stress and inflammation. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a mucolytic agent with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Long-term efficacy of NAC 600mg/d in COPD is controversial; a dose-effect relationship has been demonstrated, but at present it is not known whether a higher dose provides clinical benefits. The PANTHEON Study is a prospective, ICS stratified, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multi-center trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of high-dose (1200 mg/daily) NAC treatment for one year in moderate-to-severe COPD patients. The primary endpoint is the annual exacerbation rate. Secondary endpoints include recurrent exacerbations hazard ratio, time to first exacerbation, as well as quality of life and pulmonary function. The hypothesis, design and methodology are described and baseline characteristics of recruited patients are presented. 1006 COPD patients (444 treated with maintenance ICS, 562 ICS naive, aged 66.27±8.76 yrs, average post-bronchodilator FEV1 48.95±11.80 of predicted) have been randomized at 34 hospitals in China. Final results of this study will provide objective data on the effects of high-dose (1200 mg/daily) long-term NAC treatment in the prevention of COPD exacerbations and other outcome variables. © 2013 Informa Healthcare USA, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Zheng, J. P., Wen, F. Q., Bai, C. X., Wan, H. Y., Kang, J., Chen, P., … Zhong, N. S. (2013). High-dose N-acetylcysteine in the prevention of COPD exacerbations: Rationale and design of the PANTHEON study. COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 10(2), 164–171. https://doi.org/10.3109/15412555.2012.732628

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free