Skip to main content
. 2014 Jul 16;2014(7):CD009878. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009878.pub2

Vaessen‐Verberne 2010.

Methods DESIGN: randomised, multi‐centre, parallel‐group, double‐blind study
Participants SYMPTOMATIC ON CONVENTIONAL DOSES OF INHALED CORTICOSTEROIDS
RANDOMLY ASSIGNED: N = 158
ANALYSED: N = 151
INTERVENTION: ICS (fluticasone 200 μg/d): 78
CONTROL: ICS (fluticasone 400 μg/d): 80
WITHDRAWALS: reported
AGE: years ± SD:
INTERVENTION: ICS (fluticasone 200 μg/d): 9.4 ± 1.8
CONTROL: ICS (fluticasone 400 μg/d): 9.3 ± 1.9
GENDER: N (male %):
INTERVENTION: ICS (fluticasone 200 μg/d): 42 (54%)
CONTROL: ICS (fluticasone 400 μg/d): 49 (61%)
ASTHMA SEVERITY: not reported
ASTHMA DURATION (mean years ± SD): reported
INTERVENTION: ICS (fluticasone 200 μg/d): 5.7 ± 3.1
CONTROL: ICS (fluticasone 400 μg/d): 5.5 ± 3.0
MEAN (± SD) β2‐AGONIST USE (puffs/d): not reported
DOSE OF ICS AT STUDY ENTRY AND AT RUN‐IN: not reported
ATOPY: N (% of participants): reported
INTERVENTION: ICS (fluticasone 200 μg/d): 60 (77%)
CONTROL: ICS (fluticasone 400 μg/d): 58 (73%)
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
  • Male or female subjects aged 6 to 16 years (inclusive)

  • Subjects with a documented history of asthma for at least 6 months

  • Subjects with a documented history of BHR within 12 months before inclusion or BHR on visit 1 and/or visit 2/2A (PD20 methacholine < 150 μg or an equivalence for histamine)

  • Subjects who had received BDP, budesonide up to 100 to 200 μg bd or fluticasone propionate at a dose of up to 125 μg bd for at least 4 weeks before the start of the run‐in period

  • Subjects who had a normal length SD score between –2 SD and +2 SD as inclusion criteria for entry into the treatment period (end of run‐in period)

  • Subjects who had recorded a cumulative symptom score (daytime plus nighttime) totaling > 14 the last 14 days of the run‐in period

  • Compliance for use of FP during run‐in period of at least 50%

  • Recorded data on > 70% of daily entries into their DRC throughout run‐in period


EXCLUSION CRITERIA
  • Children with history of severe respiratory infection, cystic fibrosis, aspirative pathology, pulmonary or airways anomalies, bronchopulmonary dysplasia and congenital heart disease, or who previously received ICS or sodium cromoglycate

Interventions PROTOCOL
DURATION
  • Run‐in = 4 weeks

  • Intervention = 26 weeks


DEVICE: Diskus
DOSE OF ICS
  • INTERVENTION: fluticasone 100 μg with salmeterol 50 μg twice day

  • CONTROL: fluticasone 200 μg twice daily


CRITERIA FOR WITHDRAWAL FROM STUDY: reported
Outcomes ANALYSIS: intention‐to‐treat analysis
OUTCOMES: Many outcomes were reported at 26 weeks; participants were evaluated at 1, 6, 16 and 26 weeks
GROWTH MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUE: Height was recorded using a stadiometer at the start of the run‐in period, and at the start and at the end of the treatment period
PULMONARY FUNCTION TESTS
  • FEV1

  • FVC

  • FEV1/FVC

  • MEF50

  • PEFR

  • PD20 methacholine


FUNCTIONAL STATUS
  • Percentage of symptom‐free days


BIOMARKERS
  • Exhaled nitric oxide


ADVERSE EVENTS
  • Statural growth

  • Exacerbations

  • Adverse events


WITHDRAWALS: reported
Notes PUBLICATION: full paper (2010)
FUNDING: funded by GlaxoSmithKline
CONFIRMATION OF METHODOLOGY: received
Data received from the study author
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Using a computer random number generator
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk Central allocation (including telephone, web‐based and pharmacy‐controlled randomisation)
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Blinding of participants and key study personnel ensured
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Reasons for missing outcome data unlikely to be related to true outcomes
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk No missing outcome data
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Study protocol available and all of the study’s prespecified (primary and secondary) outcomes that are of interest in the review have been reported in the prespecified way
Other bias Low risk Study apparently free of other sources of bias