Abstract
Introduction
Childhood asthma is the most common chronic paediatric illness. There is no cure for asthma but good treatment to palliate symptoms is available. Asthma is more common in children with a personal or family history of atopy, increased severity and frequency of wheezing episodes, and presence of variable airway obstruction or bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Precipitating factors for symptoms and acute episodes include infection, house dust mites, allergens from pet animals, exposure to tobacco smoke, and exercise.
Methods and outcomes
We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of single-agent prophylaxis in children taking as-needed inhaled beta2 agonists for asthma? What are the effects of additional prophylactic treatments in childhood asthma inadequately controlled by standard-dose inhaled corticosteroids? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to June 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
Results
We found 48 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
Conclusions
In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: beta2 agonists (long-acting), corticosteroids (inhaled standard or higher doses), leukotriene receptor antagonists (oral), omalizumab, and theophylline (oral).
Key Points
Childhood asthma can be difficult to distinguish from viral wheeze and can affect up to 20% of children.
Regular monotherapy with inhaled corticosteroids improves symptoms, reduces exacerbations, and improves physiological outcomes in children with asthma symptoms requiring regular short-acting beta2 agonist treatment. Their effect on final adult height is minimal and when prescribed within recommended doses have an excellent safety record. Regular monotherapy with other treatments is not superior to low-dose inhaled corticosteroids.
Leukotriene receptor antagonists may have a role as first-line prophylaxis in very young children.
There is consensus that long-acting beta2 agonists should not be used for first-line prophylaxis.
CAUTION: Monotherapy with long-acting beta2 agonists does not reduce asthma exacerbations but may increase the chance of severe asthma episodes.
Theophylline was used as first-line prevention before the introduction of inhaled corticosteroids. Although there is weak evidence that theophylline is superior to placebo, theophylline should no longer be used as first-line prophylaxis in childhood asthma because of clear evidence of the efficacy and safety of inhaled corticosteroids.
Theophylline has serious adverse effects (cardiac arrhythmia, convulsions) if therapeutic blood concentrations are exceeded.
When low-dose inhaled corticosteroids fail to control asthma, most older children will respond to one of the add-on options available, which include addition of long-acting beta2 agonists, addition of leukotriene receptor antagonists, addition of theophylline, or increased dose of inhaled corticosteroid. However, we don't know for certain how effective these additional treatments are because we found no/limited RCT evidence of benefit compared with adding placebo/no additional treatments.
Addition of long-acting beta2 agonists may reduce symptoms and improve physiological measures compared with increased dose of corticosteroids in older children. Long-acting beta2 agonists are not currently licensed for use in children under 5 years of age.
Consensus suggests that younger children are likely to benefit from addition of leukotriene receptor antagonists.
Although there is weak evidence that addition of theophylline to inhaled corticosteroids does improve symptom control and reduce exacerbations, theophylline should only be added to inhaled corticosteroids in children aged over 5 years when the addition of long-acting beta2 agonists and leukotriene receptor antagonists have both been unsuccessful.
Omalizumab may be indicated in the secondary care setting for older children (aged over 5 years) with poorly controlled allergic asthma despite use of intermediate- and high-dose inhaled corticosteroids once the diagnosis is confirmed and compliance and psychological issues are addressed. However, we need more data to draw firm conclusions.
About this condition
Definition
Asthma is characterised by episodic wheeze, cough, and shortness of breath in association with exposure to multiple factors including rhinovirus, exercise, and allergens. The diagnosis remains entirely based on the history coupled with a positive response to treatment. Childhood asthma can affect up to 20% of children and can be difficult to diagnose in preschool children, where many individuals have acute episodic wheeze/viral-induced wheeze. Examination of the child with asthma is invariably normal and although physiological testing will characteristically find reversible airway obstruction and atopy, these tests lack precision for asthma and have no benefit in the majority of children. The absence of a widely accepted definition for asthma, a diagnostic test, and lack of a biomarker with which to objectively monitor the condition can make childhood asthma a clinical challenge, especially in young children. In cases of clinical uncertainty or where symptoms persist despite adequate treatment, referral for specialist opinion should be sought. This review deals with pharmacological management of chronic asthma in children only. For information on the management of acute asthma in children see review on Asthma and other recurrent wheezing disorders in children (acute).
Incidence/ Prevalence
Asthma prevalence rose in the UK and other Western countries during the 1980s and 1990s, but recent evidence suggests that asthma prevalence is falling; however, lifetime asthma prevalence is still reported as 24% in children aged 9 to 12 years in the UK. Genetic factors are thought to account for 60% of asthma causation, but genetic change cannot explain the rise in asthma prevalence from 4% in 1964 to present day values. The reasons for the rise and early fall in asthma prevalence are not understood but are likely to involve epigenetics and interactions between genetic predispositions and environmental exposures, including tobacco smoke.
Aetiology/ Risk factors
Asthma is a typical complex condition where genetic and environmental factors interact, often at critical stages of development. Genetic factors explain approximately 60% of asthma causation, but there is no single "asthma gene" — rather there are approximately 10 genes, each of which confer a modest increased risk for asthma. Environmental factors implicated in asthma causation include exposure to tobacco smoke, diet (including non-breast feeding), early respiratory infection, and indoor and outdoor air quality. Other non-modifiable risk factors include sex (asthma is more common in boys than girls but more common in women than men) and age (many children apparently "grow out of" their asthma).
Prognosis
A UK longitudinal study of children born in 1970 found that 29% of 5-year-olds wheezing in the past year were still wheezing at the age of 10 years. Another study followed a group of children in Melbourne, Australia, from the age of 7 years (in 1964) into adulthood. The study found that a large proportion (73%) of 14-year-olds with infrequent symptoms had few or no symptoms by the age of 28 years, whereas two-thirds of those 14-year-olds with frequent wheezing still had recurrent attacks at the age of 28 years.
Aims of intervention
To reduce or abolish cough and wheeze; to attain best possible lung function; to reduce the risk of severe attacks; to minimise sleep disturbance and absence from school; to minimise adverse effects of treatment; and to allow normal growth.
Outcomes
By contrast with other chronic conditions, there is no gold standard outcome for asthma in clinical trials; this can make for difficulties in comparing and contrasting similar clinical trials. We have separated outcomes into 4 domains: symptom control (clinical assessments): daily symptom score, daily use of short-acting beta2 agonist, exertional and nocturnal symptoms; physiological measures: FEV1, peak flow, bronchial hyperreactivity; exacerbations: hospital admission, rescue course of oral corticosteroids, unscheduled presentation to primary care, accident and emergency attendance, and hospitalisation. Adverse effects.
Methods
Clinical Evidence search and appraisal June 2010. The following databases were used to identify studies for this systematic review: Medline 1966 to June 2010, Embase 1980 to June 2010, and The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, May 2010 [online, searched 2 June 2010] (1966 to date of issue). When editing this review we used The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 3. An additional search within The Cochrane Library was carried out for the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database. We also searched for retractions of studies included in the review. Abstracts of the studies retrieved from the initial search were assessed by an information specialist. Selected studies were then sent to the contributor for additional assessment, using predetermined criteria to identify relevant studies. We included studies in children aged 1 to 12 years with asthma or recurrent wheeze of unspecified origin. We included studies including older children (>12 years) or younger children (<1 year) if the mean age of children in the study was between 1 and 12 years, or where the majority of children (at least 80%) were aged between 1 and 12 years. We excluded studies mainly in children with wheeze due to other specific respiratory disorders (e.g., bronchiolitis). Study design criteria for inclusion in this review were: published systematic reviews of RCTs and RCTs in any language. RCTs had to be at least single blinded, and contain 20 or more individuals, of whom 80% or more were followed up. There was no minimum length of follow-up required to include studies. We excluded all studies described as “open”, “open label”, or not blinded. We included systematic reviews of RCTs and RCTs where harms of an included intervention were studied applying the same study design criteria for inclusion as we did for benefits. In addition we use a regular surveillance protocol to capture harms alerts from organisations such as the FDA and the MHRA, which are added to the reviews as required. To aid readability of the numerical data in our reviews, we round many percentages to the nearest whole number. Readers should be aware of this when relating percentages to summary statistics such as relative risks (RRs) and odds ratios (ORs). We have performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions included in this review (see table). The categorisation of the quality of the evidence (high, moderate, low, or very low) reflects the quality of evidence available for our chosen outcomes in our defined populations of interest. These categorisations are not necessarily a reflection of the overall methodological quality of any individual study, because the Clinical Evidence population and outcome of choice may represent only a small subset of the total outcomes reported, and population included, in any individual trial. For further details of how we perform the GRADE evaluation and the scoring system we use, please see our website (www.clinicalevidence.com).
Table.
Important outcomes | Exacerbations, Physiological measures, Symptom control (clinical assessments) | ||||||||
Studies (Participants) | Outcome | Comparison | Type of evidence | Quality | Consistency | Directness | Effect size | GRADE | Comment |
What are the effects of single-agent prophylaxis in children taking as-needed inhaled beta2 agonists for asthma? | |||||||||
<30 (<5230) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Inhaled corticosteroids versus placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Moderate | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results |
16 (<4103) | Exacerbations | Inhaled corticosteroids versus placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Moderate | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results |
10 (<3101) | Physiological measures | Inhaled corticosteroids versus placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Moderate | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results |
8 (<1852) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus placebo | 4 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results for different outcomes and between studies |
5 (<1564) | Exacerbations | Oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus placebo | 4 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results for different outcomes and between studies |
4 (<449) | Physiological measures | Oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus placebo | 4 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results for different outcomes and between studies |
8 (<2179) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | 0 | –1 | –2 | 0 | Very low | Consistency point deducted for different results for different outcomes, time points, and for different corticosteroids. Directness points deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups in some RCTs and composite outcomes used |
4 (<1765) | Exacerbations | Oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups in some RCTs |
8 (<2086) | Physiological measures | Oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results for different outcomes, time points, and for different corticosteroids |
2 (367) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Inhaled long-acting beta2 agonist versus placebo | 4 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results for different studies and outcomes |
unclear how many RCTs (unclear how many children) | Exacerbations | Inhaled long-acting beta2 agonist versus placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and uncertainty about the number of children or RCTs included in analysis. Directness point deducted for inclusion of studies in which some children were taking additional medications for asthma |
2 (367) | Physiological measures | Inhaled long-acting beta2 agonist versus placebo | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | High | |
2 (228) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Inhaled long-acting beta2 agonists versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups |
2 (228) | Exacerbations | Inhaled long-acting beta2 agonists versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | 0 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Moderate | Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups |
2 (228) | Physiological measures | Inhaled long-acting beta2 agonists versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups |
1 (24) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Oral theophylline versus placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –2 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and crossover design. Directness points deducted for uncertainty about other treatments used and restricted population (high number of night-time awakenings due to asthma before randomisation) |
1 (24) | Exacerbations | Oral theophylline versus placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –2 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and crossover design. Directness points deducted for uncertainty about other treatments used and restricted population (high number of night-time awakenings due to asthma before randomisation) |
1 (24) | Physiological measures | Oral theophylline versus placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –2 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and crossover design. Directness points deducted for uncertainty about other treatments used and restricted population (high number of night-time awakenings due to asthma before randomisation) |
1 (195) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Oral theophylline versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and subgroup analysis. Directness point deducted for uncertainty about clinical significance of effect due to low symptom scores in this study |
1 (195) | Exacerbations | Oral theophylline versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | –3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, subgroup analysis, and incomplete reporting of results |
1 (195) | Physiological measures | Oral theophylline versus inhaled corticosteroids | 4 | –3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, subgroup analysis, and incomplete reporting of results |
What are the effects of additional prophylactic treatments in childhood asthma inadequately controlled by standard-dose inhaled corticosteroids? | |||||||||
1 (117) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Increased dose of inhaled corticosteroid versus low-dose corticosteroid | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups |
3 (1000) | Exacerbations | Increased dose of inhaled corticosteroid versus low-dose corticosteroid | 4 | –1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Moderate | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results |
3 (993) | Physiological measures | Increased dose of inhaled corticosteroid versus low-dose corticosteroid | 4 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results between studies and outcomes |
4 (1119) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Addition of long-acting beta2 agonist versus addition of placebo to inhaled corticosteroid | 4 | –1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Moderate | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results |
7 (1084) | Exacerbations | Addition of long-acting beta2 agonist versus addition of placebo to inhaled corticosteroid | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | High | |
9 (1235) | Physiological measures | Addition of long-acting beta2 agonist versus addition of placebo to inhaled corticosteroid | 4 | –1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Moderate | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results |
2 (465) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Addition of long-acting beta2 agonist versus increased dose of corticosteroid | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and crossover design of 1 RCT. Directness point deducted for composite outcome used in 1 RCT |
3 (724) | Exacerbations | Addition of long-acting beta2 agonist versus increased dose of corticosteroid | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no statistical comparison between groups in 1 RCT |
at least 5 (at least 1285) | Physiological measures | Addition of long-acting beta2 agonist versus increased dose of corticosteroid | 4 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Consistency point deducted for different results for different outcomes |
1 (<182) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Addition of long-acting beta2 agonist versus addition of leukotriene receptor antagonist | 4 | –3 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, incomplete reporting, and crossover design. Directness point deducted for use of composite outcome |
2 (69) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Addition of oral theophylline versus addition of placebo | 4 | –3 | 0 | –2 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, results after crossover, and incomplete reporting of results. Directness points deducted for regular use of oral corticosteroids instead of inhaled corticosteroids and no direct statistical comparison between groups in 1 RCT |
1 (32) | Exacerbations | Addition of oral theophylline versus addition of placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –2 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and results after crossover. Directness points deducted for regular use of oral corticosteroids instead of inhaled corticosteroids and no direct statistical comparison between groups |
1 (36) | Physiological measures | Addition of oral theophylline versus addition of placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data and incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups |
1 (279) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Addition of oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus addition of placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and results after crossover. Directness point deducted for no long-term results |
1 (279) | Exacerbations | Addition of oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus addition of placebo | 4 | –2 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for incomplete reporting of results and results after crossover. Directness point deducted for no long-term results |
1 (<182) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Addition of oral leukotriene receptor antagonists versus increased corticosteroid dose | 4 | –3 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Very low | Quality points deducted for sparse data, incomplete reporting, and crossover design. Directness point deducted for use of composite outcome |
2 (961) | Symptom control (clinical assessments) | Adding omalizumab versus adding placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Moderate | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results in 1 RCT |
2 (961) | Exacerbations | Adding omalizumab versus adding placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups in 1 RCT |
1 (334) | Physiological measures | Adding omalizumab versus adding placebo | 4 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 0 | Low | Quality point deducted for incomplete reporting of results. Directness point deducted for no direct statistical comparison between groups |
We initially allocate 4 points to evidence from RCTs, and 2 points to evidence from observational studies. To attain the final GRADE score for a given comparison, points are deducted or added from this initial score based on preset criteria relating to the categories of quality, directness, consistency, and effect size. Quality: based on issues affecting methodological rigour (e.g., incomplete reporting of results, quasi-randomisation, sparse data [<200 people in the analysis]). Consistency: based on similarity of results across studies. Directness: based on generalisability of population or outcomes. Effect size: based on magnitude of effect as measured by statistics such as relative risk, odds ratio, or hazard ratio.
Glossary
- Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)
The volume breathed out in the first second of forceful blowing into a spirometer, measured in litres.
- High-quality evidence
Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
- Low-quality evidence
Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
- Moderate-quality evidence
Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
- Orciprenaline
This is known as metaproterenol in the USA; it is a non-selective beta agonist.
- Peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR)
The maximum rate that gas is expired from the lungs when blowing into a peak flow meter or a spirometer. It is measured at an instant, but the units are expressed as litres per minute.
- Salbutamol
This is known as albuterol in the USA; it is a short-acting selective beta2 agonist.
- Very low-quality evidence
Any estimate of effect is very uncertain.
Bronchiolitis
Disclaimer
The information contained in this publication is intended for medical professionals. Categories presented in Clinical Evidence indicate a judgement about the strength of the evidence available to our contributors prior to publication and the relevant importance of benefit and harms. We rely on our contributors to confirm the accuracy of the information presented and to adhere to describe accepted practices. Readers should be aware that professionals in the field may have different opinions. Because of this and regular advances in medical research we strongly recommend that readers' independently verify specified treatments and drugs including manufacturers' guidance. Also, the categories do not indicate whether a particular treatment is generally appropriate or whether it is suitable for a particular individual. Ultimately it is the readers' responsibility to make their own professional judgements, so to appropriately advise and treat their patients. To the fullest extent permitted by law, BMJ Publishing Group Limited and its editors are not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, products liability or otherwise) whether they be direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential, resulting from the application of the information in this publication.
Contributor Information
Stephen William Turner, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Amanda Jane Friend, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Augusta Okpapi, Royal Aberdeen Children's Hospital, Aberdeen, UK.
References
- 1.Asher MI, Montefort S, Bjorksten B, et al. Worldwide time trends in the prevalence of symptoms of asthma, allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, and eczema in childhood: ISAAC Phases One and Three repeat multicountry cross-sectional surveys. Lancet 2006;368:733–743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Malik G, Tagiyeva N, Aucott L, et al. Changing trends in asthma in 9-12 year olds between 1964 and 2009. Arch Dis Child 2011;96:227–231. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Carroll W. Asthma genetics: pitfalls and triumphs. Paediatr Respir Rev 2005;6:68–74. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.McLeish S, Turner SW. Gene-environment interactions in asthma. Arch Dis Child 2007;92:1032–1035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Park ES, Golding J, Carswell F, et al. Pre-school wheezing and prognosis at 10. Arch Dis Child 1986;61:642–646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Kelly WJW, Hudson I, Phelan PD, et al. Childhood asthma in adult life: a further study at 28 years of age. BMJ 1987;294:1059–1062. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Calpin C, Macarthur C, Stephens D, et al. Effectiveness of prophylactic inhaled steroids in childhood asthma: a systematic review of the literature. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1997;100:452–457. Search date 1996. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Rachelefsky G. Inhaled corticosteroids and asthma control in children: assessing impairment and risk.Pediatrics 2009;123:353–366. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Adams NP, Bestall JC, Lasserson TJ, et al. Fluticasone versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Chen Y-Z, Busse WW, Pedersen S, et al. Early intervention of recent onset mild persistent asthma in children aged under 11 yrs: the Steroid Treatment As Regular Therapy in early asthma (START) trial. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2006;17:7–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Sheffer AL, Silverman M, Woolcock AJ, et al. Long-term safety of once-daily budesonide in patients with early onset mild persistent asthma: results of the Inhaled Steroid Treatment as Regular Therapy in Early Asthma (START) study. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2005;94:48–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Pauwels RA, Pedersen S, Busse WW, et al. Early intervention with budesonide in mild persistent asthma: a randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet 2003;361:1071–1076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Papi A, Nicolini G, Baraldi E, et al. Regular vs prn nebulized treatment in wheeze preschool children. Allergy 2009;64:1463–1471. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Kooi EM, Schokker S, Marike Boezen H, et al. Fluticasone or montelukast for preschool children with asthma-like symptoms: randomized controlled trial. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2008;21:798–804. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Bacharier LB, Phillips BR, Zeiger RS, et al. Episodic use of an inhaled corticosteroid or leukotriene receptor antagonist in preschool children with moderate-to-severe intermittent wheezing. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;122:1127–1135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Carlsen KC, Stick S, Kamin W, et al. The efficacy and safety of fluticasone propionate in very young children with persistent asthma symptoms. Respir Med 2005;99:1393–1402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Gelfand EW, Georgitis JW, Noonan M, et al. Once-daily ciclesonide in children: efficacy and safety in asthma. J Pediatr 2006;148:377–383. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Simons FER, The Canadian Beclomethasone Diproprionate–Salmeterol Xinafoate Study Group. A comparison of beclomethasone, salmeterol and placebo in children with asthma. N Engl J Med 1997;337:1659–1665. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.The Childhood Asthma Management Program Research Group. Long-term effects of budesonide or nedocromil in children with asthma. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1054–1063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Nayak A, Lanier R, Weinstein S, et al. Efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate extrafine aerosol in childhood asthma: a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Chest 2002;122:1956–1965. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Doull IJ, Freezer NJ, Holgate ST. Growth of prepubertal children with mild asthma treated with inhaled beclometasone dipropionate. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;151:1715–1719. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Sharek PJ, Bergman DA. Beclomethasone for asthma in children: effects on linear growth. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 1999. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Busse WW, Pedersen S, Pauwels RA, et al. The Inhaled Steroid Treatment As Regular Therapy in Early Asthma (START) study 5-year follow-up: effectiveness of early intervention with budesonide in mild persistent asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;121:1167–1174. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Wolthers OD, Riis BJ, Pedersen S. Bone turnover in asthmatic children treated with oral prednisolone or inhaled budesonide. Pediatr Pulmonol 1993;16:341–346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Reilly SM, Hambleton G, Adams JE, et al. Bone density in asthmatic children treated with inhaled corticosteroids. Arch Dis Child 2001;84:183–184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Drake AJ, Howells RJ, Shield JPH, et al. Symptomatic adrenal insufficiency presenting with hypoglycaemia in children with asthma receiving high dose inhaled fluticasone proprionate. BMJ 2002;324:1081–1083. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Todd GR, Acerini CL, Ross-Russell R, et al. Survey of adrenal crisis associated with inhaled corticosteroids in the United Kingdom. Arch Dis Child 2002;87:457–461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Simons FE, Persaud MP, Gillespie CA, et al. Absence of posterior subcapsular cataracts in young patients treated with inhaled corticosteroids. Lancet 1993;342:776–778. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Abuektish F, Kirkpatrick JN, Russell G. Posterior subcapsular cataract and inhaled steroid therapy. Thorax 1995;50:674–676. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Allen DB, Mullen M, Mullen B. A meta-analysis of the effect of oral and inhaled steroids on growth. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1994;93:967–976. Search date 1993. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Agertoft L, Pedersen S. Effects of long-term treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid on growth and pulmonary function in asthmatic children. Respir Med 1994;88:373–381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Agertoft L, Pedersen S. Effect of long-term treatment with inhaled budesonide on adult height in children with asthma. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1064–1069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Powell H, Gibson PG. High dose versus low dose inhaled corticosteroid as initial starting dose for asthma in adults and children. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date not reported. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Petersen R, Agertoft L, Pedersen S, et al. Treatment of exercise-induced asthma with beclomethasone dipropionate in children with asthma. Eur Respir J 2004;24:932–937. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Garcia Garcia ML, Wahn U, Gilles L, et al. Montelukast, compared with fluticasone, for control of asthma among 6- to 14-year-old patients with mild asthma: the MOSAIC study. Pediatrics 2005;116:360–369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Kumar V, Ramesh P, Lodha R, et al. Montelukast vs. inhaled low-dose budesonide as monotherapy in the treatment of mild persistent asthma: a randomized double blind controlled trial. J Trop Pediatr 2007;53:325–330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Zeiger RS, Szefler SJ, Phillips BR, et al. Response profiles to fluticasone and montelukast in mild-to-moderate persistent childhood asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;117:45–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Szefler SJ, Phillips BR, Martinez FD, et al. Characterization of within-subject responses to fluticasone and montelukast in childhood asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2005;115:233–242. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Stelmach I, Grzelewski T, Bobrowska-Korzeniowska M, et al. A randomized, double-blind trial of the effect of anti-asthma treatment on lung function in children with asthma. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2007;20:691–700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Sorkness CA, Lemanske RF, Mauger DT, et al. Long-term comparison of 3 controller regimens for mild-moderate persistent childhood asthma: The Pediatric Asthma Controller trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;119:64–72. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Knorr B, Matz J, Bernstein JA, et al. Montelukast for chronic asthma in 6–14 year old children. JAMA 1998;279:1181–1186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Knorr B, Franchi LM, Bisgaard H, et al. Montelukast, a leukotriene receptor antagonist for the treatment of persistent asthma in children aged 2–5 years. Pediatrics 2001;108:E48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Straub DA, Moeller A, Minocchieri S, et al. The effect of montelukast on lung function and exhaled nitric oxide in infants with early childhood asthma. Eur Respir J 2005;25:289–294. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Van Adelsberg J, Moy J, Wei L, et al. Safety, tolerability, and exploratory efficacy of montelukast in 6–24 month-old patients with asthma. Curr Med Res Opin 2005;21:971–979. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Robertson CF, Price D, Henry R, et al. Short-course montelukast for intermittent asthma in children: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2007;175:323–329. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Hakim F, Vilozni D, Adler A, et al. The effect of montelukast on bronchial hyperreactivity in preschool children. Chest 2007;131:180–186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Ostrom NK, Decotiis BA, Lincourt WR, et al. Comparative efficacy and safety of low-dose fluticasone propionate and montelukast in children with persistent asthma. J Pediatr 2005;147:213–220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Stelmach I, Bobrowska-Korzeniowska M, Majak P, et al. The effect of montelukast and different doses of budesonide in IgE serum levels and clinical parameters in children with newly diagnosed asthma. Pulmon Pharmacol Ther 2005;18:374–380. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Szefler SJ, Baker JW, Uryniak T, et al. Comparative study of budesonide inhalation suspension and montelukast in young children with mild persistent asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;120:1043–1050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Rodrigo GJ, Moral VP, Marcos LG, et al. Safety of regular use of long-acting beta agonists as monotherapy or added to inhaled corticosteroids in asthma. A systematic review. Pulm Pharmacol Ther 2009;22:9–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Weinstein S, Pearlman D, Bronsky E, et al. Efficacy of salmeterol xinafoate powder in children with chronic persistent asthma. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1998;81:51–58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Cates CJ, Cates MJ. Regular treatment with salmeterol for chronic asthma: serious adverse events. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Cates CJ, Cates MJ, Lasserson TJ. Regular treatment with formoterol for chronic asthma: serious adverse events. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Verberne A, Frost C, Roorda R, et al. One year treatment with salmeterol compared with beclomethasone in children with asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;156:688–695. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Pedersen S. Treatment of nocturnal asthma in children with a single dose of sustained release theophylline taken after supper. Clin Allergy 1985;15:79–85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Stein MA, Krasowski M, Leventhal BL, et al. Behavioural and cognitive effects of theophylline and caffeine. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1996;50:284–288. Search date not reported. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Tinkelman DG, Reed C, Nelson H, et al. Aerosol beclomethasone diproprionate compared with theophylline as primary treatment of chronic, mild to moderately severe asthma in children. Pediatrics 1993;92:64–77. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Tsiu SJ, Self TH, Burns R. Theophylline toxicity: update. Ann Allergy 1990;64:241–257. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Adams N, Bestall J, Jones P, et al. Beclomethasone at different doses for chronic asthma. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 1999. [Google Scholar]
- 60.Adams NP, Bestall JC, Jones P, et al. Fluticasone at different doses for chronic asthma in adults and children. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 61.Verberne A, Frost C, Duiverman E, et al. Addition of salmeterol versus doubling the dose of beclomethasone in children with asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;158:213–219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Ni Chroinin M, Lasserson TJ, Greenstone I, et al. Addition of long-acting beta-agonists to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma in children. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63.Lemanske RF, Mauger DT, Sorkness CA, et al. Step-up therapy for children with uncontrolled asthma receiving inhaled corticosteroids. N Engl J Med 2010;362:975–985. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Gappa M, Zachgo W, von Berg A, et al. Add-on salmeterol compared to double dose fluticasone in pediatric asthma: a double-blind, randomized trial (VIAPAED). Pediatr Pulmonol 2009;44:1132–1142. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Bisgaard H, Le Roux P, Bjamer D, et al. Budesonide/formoterol maintenance plus reliver therapy: a new strategy in pediatric asthma. Chest 2006;130:1733–1743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Price JF, Radner F, Lenney W, et al. Safety of formoterol in children and adolescents: experience from asthma clinical trials. Arch Dis Child 2010;95:1047–1053. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Nassif EG, Weinberger M, Thompson R, et al. The value of maintenance theophylline in steroid dependent asthma. N Engl J Med 1981;304:71–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Suessmuth S, Freihorst J, Gappa M. Low-dose theophylline in childhood asthma: a placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2003;14:394–400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Ducharme F, Schwartz Z, Hicks G, et al. Addition of anti-leukotriene agents to inhaled corticosteroids for chronic asthma. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2003. [Google Scholar]
- 70.Simons FER, Villa JR, Lee BW, et al. Montelukast added to budesonide in children with persistent asthma: a randomized double blind crossover study. J Pediatr 2001;138:694–698. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Kondo N, Katsunuma T, Odajima Y, et al. A randomized open-label comparative study of montelukast versus theophylline added to inhaled corticosteroid in asthmatic children. Allergol Int 2006;55:287–293. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Johnston NW, Mandhane PJ, Dai J, et al. Attenuation of the September epidemic of asthma exacerbations in children: a randomized, controlled trial of montelukast added to usual therapy. Pediatrics 2007;120:e702–e712. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Philip G, Hustad C, Noonan G, et al. Reports of suicidality in clinical trials of montelukast. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;124:691–696. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Walker S, Monteil M, Phelan K, et al. Anti-IgE for chronic asthma in adults and children. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2010. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Search date 2006. [Google Scholar]
- 75.Milgrom H, Berger W, Nayak A, et al. Treatment of childhood asthma with anti-immunoglobulin E antibody (omalizumab). Pediatrics 2001;108:E36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76.Lemanske RF, Nayak A, McAlary M, et al. Omalizumab improves asthma-related quality of life in children with allergic asthma. Pediatrics 2002;110:e55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Berger W, Gupta N, McAlary M, et al. Evaluation of long-term safety of the anti-IgE antibody, omalizumab, in children with allergic asthma. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2003;91:182–188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78.Lanier B, Bridges T, Kulus M, et al. Omalizumab for the treatment of exacerbations in children with inadequately controlled allergic (IgE-mediated) asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;124:1210–1216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]