Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: dose-response effects on growth

  1. Aniela I Pruteanu1,
  2. Bhupendrasinh F Chauhan2,3,
  3. Linjie Zhang4,
  4. Sílvio OM Prietsch4,
  5. Francine M Ducharme5,6,*

Editorial Group: Cochrane Airways Group

Published Online: 16 JUL 2014

Assessed as up-to-date: 5 MAR 2014

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009878.pub2


How to Cite

Pruteanu AI, Chauhan BF, Zhang L, Prietsch SOM, Ducharme FM. Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: dose-response effects on growth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 7. Art. No.: CD009878. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009878.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    University of Montreal, Research Centre, CHU Sainte-Justine and the Department of Pediatrics, Montreal, QC, Canada

  2. 2

    University of Manitoba, Knowledge Synthesis, George and Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation, Winnipeg, Canada

  3. 3

    University of Manitoba, College of Pharmacy, Winnipeg, MB, Canada

  4. 4

    Federal University of Rio Grande, Faculty of Medicine, Rio Grande, RS, Brazil

  5. 5

    University of Montreal, Department of Paediatrics, Montreal, Canada

  6. 6

    CHU Sainte-Justine, Research Centre, Montreal, Canada

*Francine M Ducharme, Department of Paediatrics, University of Montreal, Montreal, Canada. francine.m.ducharme@umontreal.ca.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 16 JUL 2014

SEARCH

 

Summary of findings    [Explanations]

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

 
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Inhaled corticosteroids dose-response effect

Inhaled corticosteroids dose-response effect

Patient or population: children with persistent asthma
Settings: outpatients
Intervention: lower-dose inhaled corticosteroids

Control: higher-dose ICS

OutcomesIllustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)Relative effect
(95% CI)
No. of participants
(studies)
Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)
Comments

Assumed riskCorresponding risk

Control group (higher-dose ICS)Intervention group (lower-dose ICS)

Growth velocity over 12 months (cm/y)
(higher is better)
Mean growth velocity was 5.74 cm/y (range, 5.6 to 5.88)Corresponding growth velocity on lower-dose ICS was 0.2 cm/y higher: mean 5.94 cm/y (95% CI 5.76 to 6.13)MD 0.20 (0.02 to 0.39)728
(4 studies)
⊕⊕⊕⊕
high
Skoner 2011 data analysed using LRS model were used

Change in height over 3 months (cm)

(higher is better)
Unadjusted mean change in height over 3 months was 1.34 cm (range, 0.9 to 1.8 cm)Corresponding unadjusted change in height on lower-dose ICS was 0.15 cm lower: mean 1.19 cm (95% CI 1.06 to 1.32)MD -0.15 (-0.28 to -0.02)944
(9 studies)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
moderate1
Data analysis was unadjusted for confounders

Change in height over 12 months (cm)
(higher is better)
Unadjusted mean change in height over a year was 4.56 cm (range, 3.6 to 5.73 cm)Corresponding unadjusted change in height on lower-dose ICS was 0.25 cm higher; mean 4.81 cm (95% CI 4.52 to 5.1)MD 0.25 (-0.04 to 0.54)548
(4 studies)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
moderate1
Data analysis was unadjusted for confounders

Change in SD scores over 12 months (height)

(low change is better)
Unadjusted mean change in SD score was -0.18 (range, -0.01 to -0.27)Corresponding mean unadjusted change on lower-dose ICS was 0.08 less; mean -0.10 (95% CI -0.21 to 0.02)MD 0.08 (-0.03 to 0.20)328
(3 studies)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
moderate1
Data analysis was unadjusted for confounders

Change in weight over 12 months (kg)
(higher is better)
Mean change in weight was 3.4 kgCorresponding mean change in weight on lower-dose ICS was 0.3 kg lower: mean 3.1 (95% CI 2.58 to 3.62)MD -0.30 (-0.82 to 0.22)408
(1 study)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
low2
Based on only 1 trial

Change in BMI over 12 months (kg/m2)
(higher is better)
Mean change in BMI was 0.7 kg/m2Corresponding mean change in BMI on lower-dose ICS was 0.2 kg/m2 less: mean 0.5 (95% CI 0.21 to 0.79)MD -0.20 (-0.49 to 0.09)408
(1 study)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
low2
Based on only 1 trial

Change in skeletal maturation over 12 months (years)

(higher is better)
Mean change in skeletal maturation was 0.95 yearsCorresponding mean change in skeletal maturation on lower-dose ICS was 0.18 years more; mean 1.13 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.29)MD 0.18 (0.02 to 0.34)181
(1 study)
⊕⊕⊝⊝
low2
Based on only 1 trial

*The basis for the assumed risk was the weighted mean control group risk across studies. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval.

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence.
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: 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.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

 1Data analysis was unadjusted for confounders.
2Based on only 1 trial.

 

Background

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

This protocol is the first of a series of three review protocols exploring the safety profile of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in terms of growth in children with persistent asthma. The present review explored the dose-response effect of ICS on growth. The second review compares the long-term effects of ICS on growth (Zhang 2011), and the third examines the effects of different drugs and delivery devices on growth. For more comprehensive background data and additional references, see Zhang 2011.

 

Description of the condition

Asthma is defined as a chronic inflammatory disorder of the airways in which many cells and cellular elements play a role. The chronic inflammation is associated with airway hyperresponsiveness that leads to recurrent episodes of wheezing, breathlessness, chest tightness and coughing, particularly at night or in the early morning. These episodes are usually associated with widespread, but variable, airflow obstruction within the lung that is often reversible either spontaneously or with treatment (GINA 2014). In developed countries, the prevalence of childhood asthma has markedly increased over the past few decades (ISAAC 1998; Masoli 2004; Asher 2010); however, this increase has recently reached a plateau in some of these countries (Lai 2009; Asher 2010). In contrast, asthma prevalence is sharply increasing in developing countries (Africa, Central and South America, Asia and the Pacific region), probably as a result of rapid and ongoing urbanisation and westernisation (Braman 2006; Asher 2010). The global burden of childhood asthma is continuing to rise.

 

Description of the intervention

ICS are widely considered the first-line treatment for persistent asthma, both in adults and in children (NHLBI 2007; BTS 2012; GINA 2014; Chauhan 2012; Lougheed 2012). Studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of ICS in controlling asthma symptoms, reducing exacerbations and hospitalisations, decreasing airway hyperresponsiveness and airway inflammation, improving pulmonary function, improving quality of life and reducing asthma-related deaths (Juniper 1990; Van Essen-Zandvliet 1992; Olivieri 1997; Van Rensen 1999; Suissa 2000; Covar 2003; Adams 2011a; Adams 2011b; Adams 2011c). Seven ICS are currently available for clinical use worldwide: beclomethasone dipropionate, budesonide, fluticasone propionate, mometasone fumarate, ciclesonide, flunisolide and triamcinolone acetate. Each inhaled corticosteroid has different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and biologic characteristics; however, all ICS can achieve similar therapeutic benefits when given at equipotent doses (Sobande 2008; BTS 2012; GINA 2014; Lougheed 2012).

The optimal doses of ICS for persistent childhood asthma remain unclear. The most recent asthma guidelines recommend initiating ICS at low or medium daily doses for children with mild to moderate persistent asthma; however, patients with more severe asthma and those with poor response to low to moderate doses of ICS may require higher doses (≥ 400 μg/d of hydrofluoroalkane (HFA)-beclomethasone or equivalent) to achieve satisfactory control of asthma (NHLBI 2007; BTS 2012; GINA 2014; Lougheed 2012).

Although ICS are generally considered safe treatment for children with asthma, the potential systemic adverse effects related to long-term use of these drugs have been, and continue to be, a matter of concern, especially the effects on growth (Pedersen 2001; Allen 2002). In 1998, based on a report of the panel of experts, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required labels on all ICS warning of a potential reduction in growth in children (FDA 1998). Since that time, the relationship between ICS and growth impairment in children with asthma has been extensively debated in the literature and more so with the advent of new molecules with allegedly safer profiles (Witzmann 2000; Brand 2001; Creese 2001; Wolthers 2001; Carlsen 2002; Price 2002a; Sizonenko 2002; Salvatoni 2003; Allen 2006).

 

How the intervention might work

ICS are the most potent anti-inflammatory drugs available for long-term treatment of persistent asthma. Possible molecular mechanisms for the anti-inflammatory effects of ICS and for corticosteroid-induced growth impairment have been reviewed previously (Barnes 2003; Zhang 2011).

 

Why it is important to do this review

One Cochrane systematic review (Sharek 2000a) produced solid evidence supporting growth suppression estimated at 1.5 cm per year over seven to 12 months for 400 μg/d inhaled chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-propelled beclomethasone (equivalent to 200 μg/d of HFA-propelled beclomethasone) in children with asthma. This review lately has been converted to a journal article (Sharek 2000b). However, it remains unclear whether corticosteroid-induced growth retardation is dose dependent. We therefore decided to conduct this systematic review to evaluate the relationship between dose of ICS and risk of growth impairment in children with persistent asthma.

 

Objectives

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

To assess whether increasing the dose of ICS is associated with slower linear growth, weight gain and skeletal maturation in children with asthma.

 

Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms
 

Criteria for considering studies for this review

 

Types of studies

Parallel-group randomised controlled trials.

 

Types of participants

Children one to 17 years of age with the diagnosis of persistent asthma.

 

Types of interventions

Each treatment group should be given the same ICS at two or more different doses via the same delivery system for at least three months. ICS may be administered as monotherapy or in combination with other non-steroidal asthma drugs (e.g. long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs)). In all included trials, the intervention group depicted is the lower-dose ICS and the control (comparison) group is the higher-dose ICS.

 

Types of outcome measures

 

Primary outcomes

Linear growth velocity (cm/y), obtained by measuring height at a number of time points during the study and performing linear regression of height over time (Price 2002a).

 

Secondary outcomes

  • Change in growth velocity standard deviation (SD), defined as the difference between an individual's growth velocity and predicted growth velocity divided by the predicted growth velocity SD for individuals of the same age and sex (and ethnicity if available) (Pedersen 2001).

  • Change in absolute height (cm) over time.
  • Change in weight (kg or z-score) over time.
  • Change in body mass index (added post hoc).
  • Change in skeletal maturation (added post hoc).

We did not intend to include lower leg length measured by knemometry as the outcome because this measurement correlates poorly with statural height and tends to overestimate potential effects of ICS on growth (Efthimiou 1998; Allen 1999).

 

Search methods for identification of studies

 

Electronic searches

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials (CAGR), which were derived through systematic searches of bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO, and through handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts (see Appendix 1 for further details). All records in the CAGR coded as 'asthma' were searched using the following terms.

(((steroid* or corticosteroid* or glucocorticoid* ) and inhal*) or budesonide or Pulmicort or fluticasone or Flixotide or Flovent or ciclesonide or Alvesco or triamcinolone or Kenalog or beclomethasone or beclometasone or Becotide or Becloforte or Becodisk or QVAR or Flunisolide or AeroBid or mometasone or Asmanex or Symbicort or Advair or Inuvair) AND (grow* or height* or SDS) AND (child* or paediat* or pediat* or adolesc* or teen* or prepubertal* or pre-pubertal* or puberty or pubertal* or infan* or toddler* or bab* or young*) AND (dose* or dosage* or delivery* or administ* or response* or high* or low*)

We also conducted a search of the ClinicalTrials.gov website. All databases were searched from their inception until March 2014 with no restriction on language of publication.

 

Searching other resources

We checked the reference lists of all primary studies and review articles for additional references. We also searched manufacturers' clinical trial databases for potentially relevant unpublished studies, if needed.

 

Data collection and analysis

 

Selection of studies

Two review authors (AP and LZ or SP) independently assessed the titles and abstracts of all potential studies for inclusion identified by the search strategy. Full-text articles were retrieved when they appeared to meet the inclusion criteria or when data in the title and abstract were insufficient to permit a clear decision regarding their inclusion. We resolved disagreements through discussion, or, if required, we consulted the third review author.

 

Data extraction and management

Two review authors (AP and BC) independently extracted data from the included trials using specially designed and pilot-tested data extraction forms. For trials with multiple reports, we extracted data from each report separately and combined information across multiple data collection forms afterwards. We resolved disagreements by discussion and entered the extracted data into RevMan version 5.1 (Review Manager 5).

We extracted the following data.

  • Study characteristics: year of publication, name of the first author, setting and source of funding/sponsorship.
  • Methods: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel, blinding of outcome assessment, completeness of outcome data, selective reporting and other sources of bias.
  • Participants: sample size, demographics, inclusion and exclusion criteria.
  • Intervention: type of ICS, dosage, frequency of administration, inhalation device, treatment duration and adherence to treatment, if available.
  • Comparator: the same corticosteroid given at different dosage regimens (the same details as for intervention).
  • Co-interventions: type, dosage regimen and duration.
  • Results: mean value of the outcome measures in each group, SD or other metrics for uncertainty (standard errors (SEs), confidence intervals (CIs), P values for differences in means) of outcome measurements in each group, number of participants who underwent randomisation, number of participants on whom outcomes were measured in each group.

 

Assessment of risk of bias in included studies

Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias for each study using the criteria outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Higgins 2008). Disagreements were resolved by discussion or by involving the third review author. We assessed the risk of bias according to the following domains.

  • Allocation sequence generation.
  • Concealment of allocation.
  • Blinding of participants and investigators.
  • Incomplete outcome data.
  • Selective outcome reporting.
  • Other risk of bias.

We noted other sources of bias. We graded each potential source of bias as low, high or unclear risk. Studies were deemed to be of high methodological quality if information on randomisation generation, blinding and incomplete outcome data was available, indicating a low risk of bias.

 

Measures of treatment effect

Measurements of growth were continuous outcomes, so we used mean difference (MD) and 95% CI as the metrics for treatment effects, as appropriate.

 

Unit of analysis issues

We considered each individual comparison as the unit of analysis. We used analysed participants as sample size rather than the number of participants randomly assigned in the included studies. We had planned three pair-wise comparisons of ICS doses in HFA-beclomethasone or equivalent: low (≤ 200 μg) versus medium (201 to 400 μg) versus high dose (> 400 μg) and low (≤ 200 μg) versus high (> 400 μg) dose (Lougheed 2012). The ICS dose equivalence used for this review was based on Canadian Asthma Guidelines (Lougheed 2012), which are based on a combination of the dose equivalency mentioned in GINA 2014 and reported safety and efficacy data: 1 μg fluticasone = 1 μg mometasone = 1 μg ciclesonide = 1 μg of hydrofluoroalkane HFA-beclomethasone = 2 μg budesonide = 2 μg CFC-BDP = 4 μg flunisolide = 4 μg triamcinolone acetate.

 

Dealing with missing data

We contacted investigators or study sponsors to verify key study characteristics and to obtain missing numerical outcome data when possible.

 

Assessment of heterogeneity

We used the I2 statistic to measure heterogeneity among the trials in each analysis. In cases of substantial heterogeneity (I2 > 50%), we explored potential sources of heterogeneity by performing prespecified subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis. We also conducted these analyses to explore the possibility of an effect modifier even if no significant heterogeneity was observed.

 

Assessment of reporting biases

We planned to contact study authors to ask them to provide missing outcome data if we suspected reporting bias. When this was not possible, and when the missing data were thought to introduce serious bias, we planned to explore the impact of excluding such studies on the overall assessment of results by performing a sensitivity analysis.

 

Data synthesis

We performed the meta-analyses using the Cochrane statistical package RevMan 5 (Review Manager 5). We used the fixed-effect model unless statistical heterogeneity was found, in which case we used the random-effects model.

 

Subgroup analysis and investigation of heterogeneity

We planned to carry out the following subgroup analyses for the primary outcome, measured at various points in time.

  • Participant age: preschoolers (two to five years), prepubertal children (> five to 12 years), adolescents (> 12 to 18 years).
  • Asthma severity: mild versus moderate versus severe.
  • ICS molecule: beclomethasone, budesonide, fluticasone, mometasone, ciclesonide, flunisolide, triamcinolone.
  • Concomitant use of non-steroidal antiasthmatic drugs: ICS alone, ICS combined with non-steroidal drugs, such as LABAs and LTRAs.
  • Dose difference of ICS in HFA-beclomethasone or equivalent (added as post hoc analysis).

 

Sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis was used to assess the potential impact of particular decisions or missing information on the findings of the review (Higgins 2008). We planned to carry out the following sensitivity analyses with regards to primary outcome by excluding from the analysis trials with the following.

  • High risk of bias owing to missing data or unbinding, or both.
  • Rate of adherence to ICS lower than 75% or lack of available data regarding adherence to treatment.
  • Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship.

 

Results

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms
 

Description of studies

 

Results of the search

The literature search conducted until March 2014 identified a total of 406 citations and abstracts (Figure 1). Of these, 71 potential full texts were reviewed thoroughly for inclusion criteria. Twenty-two trials, including 34 comparisons (Characteristics of included studies), were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 12 trials (17 comparisons) contributed no usable data to this review; four trials (five comparisons) either presented data in a different format than was specified in the protocol or reported incomplete data (Jonasson 2000; Chen 2001; Teper 2004; Gelfand 2006; Gelfand 2006 b); seven trials (11 comparisons) did not measure children's growth as an outcome (Jonasson 1998; Giorgi 1998; Peden 1998; Peden 1998 b; Baker 1999; Baker 1999 b; Kemp 1999; Kemp 1999 b; Doniec 2004; Kerwin 2008; Kerwin 2008 b) and one trial was published as an abstract (Lemanske 2004). Consequently, 10 trials (17 comparisons) published as full text contributed at least one outcome to the meta-analysis.

 FigureFigure 1. Flow diagram of screening of trials.

 

Included studies

Ten trials, reporting 17 comparisons (Allen 1998; Shapiro 1998; Shapiro 1998 b; Shapiro 1998 c; Shapiro 1998 d; Verberne 1998; Verberne 1998 b; Wasserman 2006; Sorkness 2007; Skoner 2008; Pedersen 2010; Pedersen 2010 b; Vaessen-Verberne 2010; Brand 2011; Brand 2011 b; Skoner 2011; Skoner 2011 b) and enrolling 3394 children with confirmed persistent asthma, contributed data to the review. The following information pertains only to the 17 comparisons (from 10 included trials) contributing data to this review (Characteristics of included studies). The FDA has produced a guideline on evaluation of the effects of orally inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids, specific to placebo-controlled trials in children (US FDA 2007); although some criteria were not relevant for dose-response studies, we ascertained the compliance status to these guidelines of trials that contributed data to the meta-analysis ( Table 1;  Table 2;  Table 3).

 
Design

All trials used a parallel-group design.

 
Participants

Three comparisons involved children two to five years of age (Wasserman 2006; Brand 2011; Brand 2011 b), six comparisons involved prepubertal children, five to 12 years of age (Allen 1998; Skoner 2008; Pedersen 2010; Pedersen 2010 b; Skoner 2011; Skoner 2011 b), and eight comparisons involved prepubertal and pubertal children (Shapiro 1998; Shapiro 1998 b; Shapiro 1998 c; Shapiro 1998 d; Verberne 1998; Verberne 1998 b; Sorkness 2007; Vaessen-Verberne 2010). Most trials described a gender ratio hovering around 65% male participants. With regards to asthma severity, one comparison (Skoner 2008) focused on asthmatic individuals with mild airway obstruction, two comparisons (Verberne 1998; Verberne 1998 b) focused on asthmatic individuals with mild to moderate airway obstruction, four comparisons (Shapiro 1998; Shapiro 1998 b; Shapiro 1998 c; Shapiro 1998 d) focused on asthmatic individuals with moderate to severe airway obstruction and the remaining six comparisons (Allen 1998; Wasserman 2006; Pedersen 2010; Pedersen 2010 b; Skoner 2011; Skoner 2011 b) failed to report the severity of baseline airway obstruction. Two comparisons (Brand 2011; Brand 2011 b) pertained to preschool children with recurrent wheezing and a positive asthma predictive index or a positive screening test for atopy. Asthma triggers were seldom reported.

 
Intervention duration

The duration of intervention varied from 12 weeks (seven comparisons; Shapiro 1998; Shapiro 1998 b; Shapiro 1998 c; Shapiro 1998 d; Wasserman 2006; Pedersen 2010; Pedersen 2010 b) to 24 weeks (two comparisons; Brand 2011; Brand 2011 b) to 26 weeks (one comparison; Vaessen-Verberne 2010) to 52 weeks (seven comparisons; Allen 1998; Verberne 1998; Verberne 1998 b; Sorkness 2007; Skoner 2008; Skoner 2011; Skoner 2011 b).

 
Intervention drugs

The ICS molecule used was beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) (two comparisons; Verberne 1998; Verberne 1998 b), budesonide (BUD) (four comparisons; Shapiro 1998; Shapiro 1998 b; Shapiro 1998 c; Shapiro 1998 d), ciclesonide (CIC) (five comparisons; Skoner 2008; Pedersen 2010; Pedersen 2010 b; Brand 2011; Brand 2011 b), fluticasone propionate (FP) (four comparisons; Allen 1998; Wasserman 2006; Sorkness 2007; Vaessen-Verberne 2010) or mometasone fumarate (MF) (two comparisons; Skoner 2011; Skoner 2011 b). The difference in the dose of ICS between two comparison groups (reported in HFA-beclomethasone equivalent) varied by ≤ 150 μg in most trials. Most compared 100 μg (low dose) versus 200 μg (the cutoff limit between low and medium doses of ICS); in only four comparisons (Shapiro 1998 b; Shapiro 1998 d; Verberne 1998; Vaessen-Verberne 2010 ) was the difference in the dose of ICS between groups ≥ 400 μg. Different devices were used, including aerochamber, diskhaler, dry powder inhaler, metered-dose inhaler with or without spacer, nebuliser and turbohaler (further details are available in the Characteristics of included studies table). Yet all trials used the same inhalation device in within-trial group comparisons. Adherence rate to ICS was reported by three of 10 trials; when reported, adherence was at or above 80%. All trials but one (Sorkness 2007) were funded by the pharmaceutical industry.

 
Co-intervention

Three comparisons (Verberne 1998; Pedersen 2010; Pedersen 2010 b) enrolled only participants receiving ICS as monotherapy. Eleven comparisons (Allen 1998; Shapiro 1998; Shapiro 1998 b; Shapiro 1998 c; Shapiro 1998 d; Wasserman 2006; Skoner 2008; Brand 2011; Brand 2011 b; Skoner 2011; Skoner 2011 b) reported accepting participants who were using co-interventions with additional antiasthmatic drugs such as LABAs, antileukotrienes or theophylline. Three comparisons (Verberne 1998 b; Sorkness 2007; Vaessen-Verberne 2010) specifically compared ICS alone versus ICS + LABA, without other co-interventions.

 
Outcomes

The primary outcome was linear growth velocity (zero to 12 months), which was documented in four comparisons involving prepubescent children (Allen 1998; Skoner 2008; Skoner 2011; Skoner 2011 b); in all cases, linear growth was analysed in three or more height measurements by regression analysis, with adjustment for co-variates in all but one trial (Allen 1998). Secondary outcomes included change in height, growth velocity, weight, body mass index and skeletal maturation.

 

Excluded studies

Of 406 citations searched, 384 (94%) were excluded for the following exclusive reasons (Figure 1): (1) duplicate references (N = 11), (2) not a randomised controlled trial (N = 76), (3) not a parallel-group study (N = 84), (4) participants aged < one year or ≥ 18 years (N = 33), (5) participants not asthmatic (or participants with asthma selected for another co-morbidity, e.g. hypertension, diabetes) (N = 16), (6) participants with episodic asthma (N = 2), (7) acute and emergency care settings (N = 13), (8) no daily ICS stable dose in all participants in one of the comparison groups (N = 86), (9) not testing an additional ICS dose using the same molecule in all participants of the other comparison group (N = 50), (10) co-interventions with oral corticosteroids (N = 3), and (11) treatment administered for less than 12 weeks (N = 10). Reasons for exclusion are provided in the Characteristics of excluded studiestable.

 

Risk of bias in included studies

Details on risk of bias for each included trial are presented in the Characteristics of included studies tables. A graphical summary of risk of bias judgements is presented in Figure 2. Although all trials were randomised, only 14 comparisons (41%) reported the method of randomisation.

 FigureFigure 2. Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

 

Allocation

26 comparisons did not mention the method of concealment of treatment, and eight comparisons (23.5%) reported use of an appropriate concealment technique.

 

Blinding

31 comparisons (90%) reported double-blinding with convincing details, two comparisons (Chen 2001; Doniec 2004) did not report sufficient information to allow the review authors to ascertain blinding and one comparison (Giorgi 1998) used an open-label study design.

 

Incomplete outcome data

31 comparisons (91%) reported all data with balanced numbers in both groups, and data from three comparisons (Giorgi 1998; Chen 2001; Lemanske 2004) were unclear. All trials reported numbers of and reasons for withdrawals in both comparison groups. The proportion of overall withdrawals was variable between studies (10% to 30%), with a balance in withdrawal rates noted between groups given different ICS doses.

 

Selective reporting

33 comparisons (97%) reported all outcomes mentioned in the methods section, with no apparent bias, and one comparison (Chen 2001) was unclear.

 

Other potential sources of bias

In 31 comparisons, we encountered no other significant sources of bias, two comparisons (Chen 2001; Doniec 2004) were unclear and one comparison (Giorgi 1998) was an open-label study for which the primary outcome was not specified clearly.

Except for three trials, all eligible trials contributing data were of high methodological quality. Two of four comparisons contributing to the primary outcome (Allen 1998; Skoner 2008) were of high methodological quality.

 

Effects of interventions

See:  Summary of findings for the main comparison Inhaled corticosteroids dose-response effect

 

Primary outcomes

 
Linear growth velocity (cm/y)

A statistically significant group difference in linear growth (cm/y) over 12 months was noted between intervention (lower ICS dose) and control (higher ICS dose) groups (four comparisons; N = 728 children; MD 0.20 cm/y, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.39; Figure 3); no heterogeneity was apparent. The different molecules used (mometasone, ciclesonide and fluticasone) did not seem to influence the magnitude of effect: χ2 = 2.19; df = 2; P value 0.33;  Analysis 1.2; Figure 4). Data from Skoner 2011 weighed 10% in the primary outcome analysis. In Skoner 2011, growth velocity was analysed using two different statistical models: a longitudinal random slope (LRS) model and an individual regression (IR) model; results from both of these methods were reported. The IR model resulted in poor estimates of growth rate with lower precision, as admitted by the study authors, and led to a different confidence interval around the pooled results. In contrast, the LRS model provided more robust growth rates. Consequently, we chose the data derived using the best (LRS) model, which led to a significant group difference in the primary outcome, recognising that use of the IR model would have led to a group difference approaching, but not reaching, statistical significance.

 FigureFigure 3. Forest plot of comparison: 1 Inhaled corticosteroids dose-response effect, outcome: 1.1 Growth velocity (cm/y) by stadiometry from 0-12 months.
 FigureFigure 4. Forest plot of comparison: 1 Inhaled corticosteroids dose-response effect, outcome: 1.2 Subgroup analysis on the ICS molecules: growth velocity by stadiometry from 0-12 months.

We could not perform subgroup analysis on age, severity and ICS dose, as all trials contributing data to the primary outcome had similar characteristics in that they enrolled prepubertal children with mild or unknown severity of airway obstruction, used similarly low ICS doses and did not report or failed to specify the use of co-interventions. Of note, in all four comparisons contributing data, the ICS dose difference between the two groups was less than or equal to 150 μg of HFA-beclomethasone.

As all trials contributing data to the primary outcome were published in full text with high methodological quality and were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry, we could not perform sensitivity analyses to assess bias due to publication status, poor methodology or funding status. As the adherence rate for ICS was seldom or incompletely reported, sensitivity analysis was not performed on this criterion.

No statistically significant group differences in linear growth (standardised in cm/y) were seen over the first three months (six comparisons; N = 1114 children; MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.51 to 0.27;  Analysis 1.3) and no heterogeneity was apparent. Only two comparisons from the same trial provided data on growth velocity from zero to six months ( Analysis 1.4) and from three to six months ( Analysis 1.5); in both cases, a statistically significant group difference was not reported.

 

Secondary outcomes

 
Change in growth velocity (cm/y)

Only one trial reported change in growth velocity from zero to 12 months with no statistically significant group difference (one comparison; N = 181 children; MD 0.06 cm/y, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.55;  Analysis 1.6).

 
Change in height (cm)

This outcome reflects the net change between final and initial height, without linear regression or adjustment for important co-variates such as age, sex, puberty and baseline height. A statistically significant group difference was noted in the change in height from zero to three months in favour of the higher ICS dose (nine comparisons; N = 944 children; MD -0.15 cm, 95% CI -0.28 to -0.02;  Analysis 1.7); children were described as having mild to moderate to severe asthma, and the ICS used were cicleconide, budesonide and fluticasone. However, the group difference was not statistically significant over longer or subsequent periods, that is, from zero to six months (three comparisons; N = 211 children; MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.27) ( Analysis 1.8), from three to six months (two comparisons; N = 58 children; MD -0.01, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.71) ( Analysis 1.9) and from zero to 12 months (four comparisons; N = 548 children; MD 0.25, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.54;  Analysis 1.10).

 
Change in standard deviation score (SDS) (height)

No statistically significant group difference in change in SDS (height) from zero to 12 months was reported (three comparisons; N = 328 children; MD 0.08, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.20;  Analysis 1.11).

 
Change in weight (kg)

No significant group difference in change in weight was seen from zero to three months ( Analysis 1.12), from zero to six months ( Analysis 1.13) and from zero to 12 months ( Analysis 1.14).

 
Change in body mass index (BMI) (kg/m2)

No significant group difference in change in BMI was noted from zero to six months ( Analysis 1.15) or from zero to 12 months ( Analysis 1.16).

 
Change in skeletal maturation

Only one trial reported change in skeletal maturation, with a statistically significant group difference from zero to 12 months in favour of a lower ICS dose (one comparison; N = 181 children; MD 0.18, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.34;  Analysis 1.17).

 

Discussion

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

This meta-analysis aggregated data from 10 paediatric trials, providing 17 comparisons, as several studies tested more than two different doses of ICS or provided additional data subgrouped by age. In the four trials reporting the main outcome, a statistically significant group difference was seen in linear growth velocity measured by stadiometry over 12 months in prepubertal school-aged children treated with low doses (i.e. 50 to 100 μg) versus low to medium doses (i.e. 200 μg of fluticasone, mometasone and ciclesonide). Of note, the statistically significant group difference was observed despite the small ICS dose difference between compared groups, varying between 100 and 150 μg/d (although most vary by 100 μg/d) of HFA-propelled beclomethasone or equivalent in the four studies pooled. Of interest, a change in height between zero and three months showed a significant decrease of 0.15 cm in the opposite direction, that is, in disfavour of a lower ICS dose, underlying the impact of neglecting important co-variates influencing growth (e.g. sex). This also raised the possibility of a beneficial effect of rapidly achieving asthma control (although this was not measured) and the impact of the timing of measurement of effect size, as this unadjusted group difference was not observed over subsequent and longer time periods. No statistically significant change from baseline in linear growth velocity, weight and body mass index was noted over zero to 12 months of ICS therapy in children. Our findings suggest a clear, yet small, dose-dependent effect on growth when ICS are used at 200 μg/d or less—the cutoff for low to medium doses of ICS in children.

The main outcome, growth velocity, that is, the pattern of growth measured repeatedly over time and adjusted for relevant co-variates (in all individual trials but one (Allen 1998)), was measured in prepubertal school-aged children (< 12 years) treated with fluticasone propionate, ciclesonide and mometasone for 52 weeks. Of the 10 trials contributing data, only three trials (four comparisons) contributed data to the primary outcome (i.e. growth velocity (cm/y)) from zero to 12 months; all performed repeated height measurements using a stadiometer, were funded by pharmaceutical companies and were of high methodological quality. Trials used either a dry powder inhaler or a metered-dose inhaler with spacer to deliver these three molecules with lower systemic bioavailability than budesonide and beclomethasone. Because of trial homogeneity, it was not possible to explore a possible modifier effect of age, severity of airway obstruction, asthma control, use of co-interventions and ICS dose difference on growth velocity. Indeed, trials contributing data to this outcome predominantly compared low ICS doses versus low to medium doses, with a dose difference of 100 to 150 μg/d of HFA-beclomethasone equivalent (GINA 2014); higher doses of ICS theoretically offer greater potential for growth suppression (NHLBI Expert Panel Report 2012).

No effect of the choice of molecules within those tested was apparent. Indeed, several placebo-controlled trials and Cochrane reviews have documented molecule dependency of growth suppression of ICS. Zhang and colleagues (Zhang 2011) are evaluating the growth-suppressive effect of several ICS molecules compared with placebo, reporting minimal and less effect of fluticasone, mometasone and ciclesonide compared with budesonide and beclomethasone. Trials aggregated in this latter review had independently documented a growth-suppressive effect at equivalent ICS doses of between 1.1 and 1.2 cm/y (CAMP Research Group 2000; CAMP Research Group 2012) with budesonide, 0.7 cm/y with mometasone (Skonner 2011), a non-significant group difference of 0.43 cm/y with fluticasone (Sharek 2000b) and none with ciclesonide (Skoner 2008) in prepubertal school-aged children, suggesting molecule dependence of the impact of ICS on growth. This finding is consistent with that of a previous Cochrane systematic review (Sharek 2000a), which had produced solid evidence supporting the growth suppression of 400 μg of inhaled CFC-propelled beclomethasone (equivalent to 200 HFA-BDP) estimated at 1.54 cm/y over seven to 12 months in children with mild to moderate asthma. Current findings provide a clear indication that the use of ICS molecules believed to have no or little suppressive effect does have a minor, yet statistically significant, effect on growth when used at the lowest cutoff of the medium dosage compared with a lower dose.

In this review, the observed group difference of 0.2 cm in growth velocity over the first year of treatment (with an upper confidence interval limit of 0.4 cm/y), associated with an ICS dose higher by 100 to 150 μg, represents less than half the observed effect with similar doses compared with placebo (CAMP Research Group 2000; Sharek 2000a; Sharek 2000b; Skonner 2011; CAMP Research Group 2012). It is consistent with a very small dose-response effect and arguably is impossible to detect on a standard growth curve. One must recognise that the small observed group difference with the use of most recent molecules (fluticasone, mometasone and ciclesonide) might be much higher with a higher ICS dose and/or with older molecules (budesonide and beclomethasone), which have well-documented growth-suppressing effects.

The two included trials (Shapiro 1998 b; Verberne 1998) that compared low doses versus higher doses of ICS (800 HFA-BDP equivalent) contributed between 3% and 30% of the weight in only a few outcomes (1.7, 1.8, 1.10, 1.11 and 1.12), such that we cannot adequately explore the possibility of a differential effect on growth of a high versus low ICS dose. Although poorly controlled asthma may delay growth in children (NHLBI Expert Panel Report 2012), evidence to support this statement is weak. Yet we cannot rule out the possibility of a growth-suppressive effect of poorly controlled asthma in children receiving a lower ICS dose, which could counterbalance the growth suppression associated with a higher ICS dose. If disease-associated growth suppression was indeed possible, even in children with mild to moderate asthma, the design of this review is adequate, as we are interested in the net growth-suppressive effect of ICS therapy in children with asthma. In the absence of a placebo-controlled group, we cannot rule out the unlikely hypothesis that most growth retardation may occur at a very low dose of ICS therapy, which could explain the clinically small group difference between different ICS doses. The systemic availability of ICS is directly related to cortisol suppression and growth suppression, especially in children. The particle size of the drug molecule and use of different devices influence systemic availabilities (Martin 2002; Agertoft 2003; Agertoft 2003a). The third of this series of Cochrane reviews will examine the effects of different devices on the growth of asthmatic children.

As trials contributing data lasted a maximum of one year, the long-term impact of different ICS doses on growth velocity beyond one year could not be explored. Our observations complement those of several placebo-controlled studies, suggesting that the growth-suppressive effect of ICS is non-cumulative (Simons 1997) and may be associated with partial catch-up (Guilbert 2006a), as a growth deficit may be sustained until adulthood (CAMP Research Group 2012).

Of interest, the significant group difference in the 'unadjusted' change in height between zero and three months suggests a favourable effect of ICS on growth in the first three months of use, perhaps via improved asthma control. Of note, 54% of the weight of this analysis is derived from a single trial testing various doses of ciclesonide (with a molecule with no demonstrated suppressive effect on growth) in children with partially or poorly controlled asthma (Pedersen 2010; Pedersen 2010 b). However, this hypothesis is weakened by the absence of any statistically significant effect observed between three and six months and between zero and six months, suggesting a transient beneficial effect on growth, insufficient power or a type 1 error, that is, falsely identifying a significant effect when one does not exist. Of importance, the absence of adjustment for important confounders decreases the quality of the evidence derived from this outcome.

No statistically significant group difference was observed in other aggregated parameters, namely, change from baseline in weight, change in SD scores (height) and body mass index. A significant group difference in skeletal maturation of a quarter of a year was observed, in disfavour of a higher dose (200 μg/d), with an ICS group difference of 100 μg/d of HFA-propelled beclomethasone or equivalent (Allen 1998). Given that children with asthma may have delayed puberty (boys more than girls) (NHLBI Expert Panel Report 2012), whether the delayed maturation is due to poorer asthma control or is associated with greater use of ICS, or both, remains to be determined. Nevertheless, the observation on skeletal maturation, derived from a single study, requires replication.

 

Summary of main results

Three industry-funded trials with high methodological quality (resulting in four dose comparisons) contributed data to the main outcome, that is, growth velocity; they measured 728 school-aged children with mild to moderate asthma and used one of three molecules (fluticasone, ciclesonide or mometasone) to compare groups with a dose difference ≤ 150 μg over 52 weeks. A significant group difference in linear growth was observed over 12 months, indicating lower growth velocity in the higher ICS dose group (mean difference 0.20 cm/y, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.39); no heterogeneity was apparent. Within aggregated trials, the different ICS molecules did not significantly influence the magnitude of effect (P value 0.33), but no trial contributing data to the main outcome used budesonide or beclomethasone.

 

Overall completeness and applicability of evidence

This review summarises the best evidence available until March 2014 as derived from 10 trials (resulting in 17 comparisons) aggregating 3394 children with mild to moderate persistent asthma. Most trials were of high methodological quality. The systematic search, which identified eligible trials from published and unpublished reports (406 citations) and used selection and data extraction by two independent review authors, minimised the risk of inclusion bias. The outstanding collaboration of study authors and pharmaceutical groups from six trials (resulting in eight comparisons) allowed us to obtain additional unpublished data and to confirm methodological quality, both of which strengthened the meta-analysis. Because of the paucity of trials reporting these data, four of 15 secondary outcomes could not be aggregated. The long-term impact of low versus high ICS dose on growth velocity, weight, skeletal maturation and body mass index in children using the same and older ICS molecules beyond one year of follow-up remains to be addressed. Sensitivity analysis could not be performed, as all trials were at low risk of bias, the adherence rate of ICS was seldom reported and all included trials contributing data to the main outcome were funded by the pharmaceutical industry and published as full text. In real life, most physicians would adjust downward or upward the dose of ICS needed to maintain control; we acknowledge that the artificially fixed dose for one to four years would overestimate growth suppression when compared with the recommended practice of decreasing to the minimal effective dose, yet this is a basic requirement of FDA guidelines for assessment of the effects of ICS on growth. Our study results support the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guideline recommendations and serve as a reminder that physicians should strive to adjust to the minimal effective ICS dose, irrespective of the ICS molecule selected.

 

Quality of the evidence

The quality of evidence of growth velocity was high, but for outcomes reflecting change in height from baseline between treatment groups, the quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate owing to possible prognostic imbalance from the use of unadjusted data in the analysis. We downgraded the quality of evidence to low for BMI, weight and skeletal maturation due to imprecision (See  Summary of findings for the main comparison).

 

Potential biases in the review process

Some bias may or may not have affected the magnitude of effect. All trials contributing data to the main outcome used a stadiometer to measure growth; this enhances the internal validity of the findings. As each trial compared different doses using the same device, we could not explore the possibility that the magnitude of effect may be associated with the choice of inhalation device; however a linked Cochrane review is addressing this point (Zhang 2011).

 

Agreements and disagreements with other studies or reviews

To our knowledge, no prior systematic review has evaluated the relationship between dose of ICS and risk of growth impairment in children with persistent asthma.

 

Authors' conclusions

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

 

Implications for practice

In prepubescent school-aged children with mild to moderate persistent asthma, a very small but statistically significant difference in linear growth over 12 months was observed between groups using ICS, with a dose difference ≤ 150 μg HFA-beclomethasone equivalent over 52 weeks. A group difference of 0.2 cm was observed, favouring higher growth velocity with the lower ICS dose of fluticasone, mometasone or ciclesonide. As ICS doses most often were in the low range or at the limit of low and medium doses (200 μg), data were insufficient to allow exploration of a potential dose-response relationship between ICS for a difference greater than 150 μg. We are unable to comment on the possible effects on growth of different ICS molecules, although fluticasone, mometasone and ciclesonide at doses of 200 μg/d or less did not appear to explain any variation in the size of effect across the studies. In view of prevailing parents’ and physicians’ concerns about the growth-suppressive effect of ICS, lack or inadequate reporting of growth measurements in more than 86% (19/22) of eligible paediatric trials is a matter of concern and should call for systematic reporting of growth in all ICS paediatric trials. Until more data on low versus moderate and higher ICS doses are available, we recommend that ICS should be used at the lowest effective dose with the safest ICS molecules, and that children's growth should be systematically monitored during any ICS treatment.

 
Implications for research

Long-term (longer than one year) trials of high methodological quality with adequate documentation of linear growth velocity in children with asthma treated with ICS are needed to provide a fair comparison of the safety of different ICS dose options. Future trials should aim for the following design characteristics.

  • Pragmatic effectiveness trials.
  • Double-blinding, adequate randomisation and complete reporting of withdrawals and dropouts with intention-to-treat analysis.
  • Parallel-group design.
  • Complete reporting of continuous (denominators, mean change and mean standard deviation of change) and dichotomous (denominators and rate) data.
  • Minimal intervention period of 12 to 24 weeks to assess medium-term effects and, over several years, to assess the long-term impact of different ICS doses.
  • Measuring and reporting, at minimum, of linear growth velocity at different time points during the study.
  • Measuring and reporting of the change in standard deviation score (SDS) in growth velocity, in absolute gain in height, in weight z-score, in BMI and in skeletal maturation between the beginning and the end of treatment.
  • Adequate reporting of the adherence rate and concomitant use of non-steroidal antiasthmatic drugs.
  • Additional studies evaluating the impact on growth of LABA (long-acting beta-agonist) as a concomitant drug in children with ICS.

Given the paucity of paediatric trials reporting growth, growth measurements should be a requirement for all ICS drug trials whether funded by pharmaceutical companies or national granting agencies.

 

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

We are indebted to the following individuals, who replied to our request for confirmation of methodology and additional data in the requested format when possible: Dr. Paul LP Brand, Dr. AA Vaessen-Verberne.

A special thanks to the following pharmaceutical groups, which replied to our request for confirmation of methodology and additional data in the requested format when possible: GlaxoSmithKline Inc, Takeda Global Research & Development Centre (Europe) Ltd and AstraZeneca R&D, Mölndal, Sweden.

We are indebted to the Cochrane Airways Review Group, namely, Dr Emma Welsh, Elizabeth Stovold and Emma Jackson, for assistance with the literature search and ongoing support. A special thanks to Taixiang Wu from the Cochrane Review Group for assistance in translating three Chinese references.

We are thankful to Inge Axelsson for providing inputs to drafting of the protocol.

 

Data and analyses

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms
Download statistical data

 
Comparison 1. Inhaled corticosteroids dose-response effect

Outcome or subgroup titleNo. of studiesNo. of participantsStatistical methodEffect size

 1 Growth velocity (cm/y) by stadiometry from 0-12 months4728Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.20 [0.02, 0.39]

 2 Subgroup analysis on the ICS molecules: growth velocity by stadiometry from 0-12 months4728Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.20 [0.02, 0.39]

    2.1 Mometasone
2139Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.58 [0.02, 1.13]

    2.2 Ciclesonide
1408Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.13 [-0.09, 0.35]

    2.3 Fluticasone
1181Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.24 [-0.16, 0.64]

 3 Growth velocity (cm/y) by stadiometry from 0-3 months61114Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)-0.12 [-0.51, 0.27]

 4 Growth velocity (cm/y) by stadiometry from 0-6 months260Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)-0.33 [-2.40, 1.75]

 5 Growth velocity (cm/y) by stadiometry from 3-6 months258Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)-0.13 [-3.35, 3.10]

 6 Change in growth velocity (cm/y) by stadiometry from 0-12 months1Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)Totals not selected

 7 Change in height (cm) by stadiometry from 0-3 months9944Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)-0.15 [-0.28, -0.02]

 8 Change in height (cm) by stadiometry from 0-6 months3211Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.03 [-0.27, 0.33]

 9 Change in height (cm) by stadiometry from 3-6 months258Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)-0.01 [-0.74, 0.71]

 10 Change in height (cm) by stadiometry from 0-12 months4548Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.25 [-0.04, 0.54]

 11 Change in SD scores (height) from 0-12 months3328Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)0.08 [-0.03, 0.20]

 12 Change in weight (kg) from 0-3 months5449Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)0.27 [-0.13, 0.66]

 13 Change in weight (kg) from 0-6 months2346Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.0 [-0.24, 0.24]

 14 Change in weight (kg) from 0-12 months1Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)Totals not selected

 15 Change in BMI (kg/m2) from 0-6 months2278Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)0.05 [-0.22, 0.33]

 16 Change in BMI (kg/m2) from 0-12 months1Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)Totals not selected

 17 Change in skeletal maturation (years) from 0-12 months1Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)Totals not selected

 

Appendices

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms
 

Appendix 1. Sources and search methods for the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR)

 

Electronic searches: core databases


DatabaseFrequency of search

MEDLINE (Ovid)weekly

EMBASE (Ovid)weekly

CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library)monthly

PsycINFO (Ovid)monthly

CINAHL (EBSCO)monthly

AMED (EBSCO)monthly



 

 

Handsearches: core respiratory conference abstracts


ConferenceYears searched

American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (AAAAI)2001 onwards

American Thoracic Society (ATS)2001 onwards

Asia Pacific Society of Respirology (APSR)2004 onwards

British Thoracic Society Winter Meeting (BTS)2000 onwards

Chest Meeting2003 onwards

European Respiratory Society (ERS)1992, 1994, 2000 onwards

International Primary Care Respiratory Group Congress (IPCRG)2002 onwards

Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand (TSANZ)1999 onwards



 

 

MEDLINE search strategy used to identify trials for the CAGR

 

Asthma search

1. exp Asthma/

2. asthma$.mp.

3. (antiasthma$ or anti-asthma$).mp.

4. Respiratory Sounds/

5. wheez$.mp.

6. Bronchial Spasm/

7. bronchospas$.mp.

8. (bronch$ adj3 spasm$).mp.

9. bronchoconstrict$.mp.

10. exp Bronchoconstriction/

11. (bronch$ adj3 constrict$).mp.

12. Bronchial Hyperreactivity/

13. Respiratory Hypersensitivity/

14. ((bronchial$ or respiratory or airway$ or lung$) adj3 (hypersensitiv$ or hyperreactiv$ or allerg$ or insufficiency)).mp.

15. ((dust or mite$) adj3 (allerg$ or hypersensitiv$)).mp.

16. or/1-15

 

Filter to identify RCTs

1. exp "clinical trial [publication type]"/

2. (randomised or randomised).ab,ti.

3. placebo.ab,ti.

4. dt.fs.

5. randomly.ab,ti.

6. trial.ab,ti.

7. groups.ab,ti.

8. or/1-7

9. Animals/

10. Humans/

11. 9 not (9 and 10)

12. 8 not 11

The MEDLINE strategy and RCT filter are adapted to identify trials in other electronic databases.

 

What's new

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

Last assessed as up-to-date: 5 March 2014.


DateEventDescription

17 January 2016AmendedDuring the translation process some text has been edited in the PLS and Abstract for clarity.



 

Contributions of authors

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

Aniela Ignea Pruteanu reviewed the literature search conducted until March2014, identified and reviewed all citations for relevance, reviewed all included trials for methodology and data extraction, verified all references, described the studies and performed data entry, analysed and interpreted results of the meta-analysis, wrote the first draft of the manuscript and approved the final version.

Bhupendrasinh Chauhan reviewed all included trials for methodology and data extraction, verified the description of studies and data entry, contributed to analysis and interpretation of data, revised all drafts of the manuscript, prepared responses to editorial comments and approved the final version.

Linjie Zhang wrote the review protocol, reviewed the literature search conducted until March2014, identified and reviewed half of the citations for relevance and approved the final version of the review.

Sílvio OM Prietsch provided input to drafting of the protocol, reviewed the literature search conducted until March 2014 and identified and reviewed half of the citations for relevance.

Prof Francine Ducharme revised and approved the protocol, requested the literature search, identified and contacted corresponding authors and/or pharmaceutical companies to solicit their collaboration in this review and in identifying other possibly relevant trials, corresponded with authors or pharmaceutical companies to verify methodology and data extraction, verified all references, described studies and performed data entry, analysed and interpreted results and approved the final version of the meta-analysis.

 

Declarations of interest

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

Aniela Ignea Pruteanu, Bhupendrasinh Chauhan, Linjie Zhang and Sílvio OM Prietsch: none known.

Prof. Francine Ducharme has received travel support, research funds and fees for speaking from Glaxo SmithKline, Novartis, Nycomed and/or Merck Frosst Inc.

 

Sources of support

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms
 

Internal sources

  • None, Other.

 

External sources

  • No sources of support supplied

 

Differences between protocol and review

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

The review is different from the protocol in the following ways.

  • Limited lower age to one year instead of 'up to 18 years.'
  • Defined which other interventions were accepted: other non-steroidal asthma drugs (e.g. long-acting beta-agonists or leukotriene receptor antagonists).
  • Added post hoc secondary outcomes (change in body mass index; change in skeletal maturation).
  • Removed subgroup analyses as they were included as different outcomes: time points of outcome measurements.
  • Added post hoc analysis: ICS dose difference (in μg of HFA-beclomethasone or equivalent) between groups.
  • Added two outcomes: change in body mass index and change in skeletal maturation.
  • Following recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Higgins 2008), the fixed effect model was used for the data analysis if the heterogeneity of pooled trials is less than 50%; otherwise the random effects model was used, despite the use of random effect models was proposed for all data analysis in the protocol.
  • Several included trials contributed more than one comparison and one group compared with two or more groups. So the individual comparison was used as the unit of analysis in place of individual trial.

 

Index terms

  1. Top of page
  2. Summary of findings    [Explanations]
  3. Background
  4. Objectives
  5. Methods
  6. Results
  7. Discussion
  8. Authors' conclusions
  9. Acknowledgements
  10. Data and analyses
  11. Appendices
  12. What's new
  13. Contributions of authors
  14. Declarations of interest
  15. Sources of support
  16. Differences between protocol and review
  17. Index terms

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)

Administration, Inhalation; Adrenal Cortex Hormones [*administration & dosage; adverse effects]; Androstadienes [administration & dosage; adverse effects]; Anti-Asthmatic Agents [*administration & dosage; adverse effects]; Asthma [*drug therapy]; Beclomethasone [administration & dosage; adverse effects]; Budesonide [administration & dosage; adverse effects]; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Fluticasone; Growth [*drug effects]; Growth Disorders [*chemically induced]; Mometasone Furoate; Pregnadienediols [administration & dosage; adverse effects]; Pregnenediones [administration & dosage; adverse effects]; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

MeSH check words

Child; Humans

References

References to studies included in this review

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Summary of findings
  4. Background
  5. Objectives
  6. Methods
  7. Results
  8. Discussion
  9. Authors' conclusions
  10. Acknowledgements
  11. Data and analyses
  12. Appendices
  13. What's new
  14. Contributions of authors
  15. Declarations of interest
  16. Sources of support
  17. Differences between protocol and review
  18. Characteristics of studies
  19. References to studies included in this review
  20. References to studies excluded from this review
  21. Additional references
Allen 1998 {published data only}
Baker 1999 {published data only}
  • Baker J, Mellon M, Wald J, Welch M, Cruz-Rivera M. A multiple-dosing, placebo-controlled study of budesonide inhalation suspension given once or twice daily for treatment of persistent asthma in young children and infants. Pediatrics 1999;103(2):414-21.
Baker 1999 b {published data only}
  • Baker J, Mellon M, Wald J, Welch M, Cruz-Rivera M. A multiple-dosing, placebo-controlled study of budesonide inhalation suspension given once or twice daily for treatment of persistent asthma in young children and infants. Pediatrics 1999;103(2):414-421.
Brand 2011 {published data only}
  • Brand PL, Luz Garcia-Garcia M, Morison A, Vermeulen JH, Weber HC. Ciclesonide in wheezy preschool children with a positive asthma predictive index or atopy. Respiratory Medicine 2011;105(11):1588-95.
Brand 2011 b {published data only}
  • Brand PL, Luz Garcia-Garcia M, Morison A, Vermeulen JH, Weber HC. Ciclesonide in wheezy preschool children with a positive asthma predictive index or atopy. Respiratory Medicine 2011/11;105(11):1588-95.
Chen 2001 {published data only}
  • Chen A, Chen R,  Zhong N. Systemic side effects of long-term treatment with low dose inhaled corticosteroids in children with asthma. Chinese Journal of Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases 2001;24(12):740-3.
Doniec 2004 {published data only}
  • Doniec Z, Pierzchala-Koziec K, Tomalak W, Nowak D, Kurzawa R. Powder budesonide decreases plasma level of native and cryptic met-enkephalin in asthmatic children. International Review of Allergology and Clinical Immunology 2004;10(3):105-9.
Gelfand 2006 {published data only}
Gelfand 2006 b {published data only}
Giorgi 1998 {published data only}
  • Giorgi PL, Oggiano N, Kantar A, Coppa GV, Ricciotti R, Arena F, et al. Bone metabolism in children with asthma treated with nebulized flunisolide: a multicenter Italian study. Current Therapeutic Research, Clinical and Experimental 1998;59(12):896-908.
Jonasson 1998 {published data only}
  • Jónasson G, Carlsen K-H, Blomqvist P. Clinical efficacy of low-dose inhaled budesonide once or twice daily in children with mild asthma not previously treated with steroids. European Respiratory Journal 1998;12:1099-104.
Jonasson 2000 {published data only}
Kemp 1999 {published data only}
  • Kemp JP, Skoner DP, Szefler SJ, Walton-Bowen K, Cruz-Rivera M, Smith JA. Once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension for the treatment of persistent asthma in infants and young children. Annals of Allergy 1999;83(3):231-9.
Kemp 1999 b {published data only}
  • Kemp JP, Skoner DP, Szefler SJ, Walton-Bowen K, Cruz-Rivera M. Once-daily budesonide inhalation suspension for the treatment of persistent asthma in infants and young children. Annals of Allergy 1999;83(3):231-9.
Kerwin 2008 {published data only}
  • Kerwin EM, Pearlman DS, de Guia T, Carlsson LG, Gillen M, Uryniak T, et al.  Evaluation of efficacy and safety of budesonide delivered via two dry powder inhalers. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2008;24(5):1497-510.
Kerwin 2008 b {published data only}
  • Kerwin EM, Pearlman DS, de Guia T, Carlsson LG, Gillen M, Uryniak T. Evaluation of efficacy and safety of budesonide delivered via two dry powder inhalers. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2008;24(5):1497-510.
Lemanske 2004 {published data only}
  • Lemanske RF, Lockey RF, Murphy KR. Effects of one year of treatment with mometasone furoate metered dose inhaler (MF-MDI) on growth in children with asthma. European Respiratory Journal 2004;24(Suppl 48):379s.
Peden 1998 {published data only}
  • Peden DB, Berger WE, Noonan MJ, Thomas MR, Hendricks VL, Hamedani AG. Inhaled fluticasone propionate delivered by means of two different multidose powder inhalers is effective and safe in a large pediatric population with persistent asthma. Journal of Allergy & Clinical Immunology 1998;102(1):32-8.
Peden 1998 b {published data only}
  • Peden DB, Berger WE, Noonan MJ, Thomas MR, Hendricks VL, Hamedani AG. Inhaled fluticasone propionate delivered by means of two different multidose powder inhalers is effective and safe in a large pediatric population with persistent asthma. Journal of Allergy & Clinical Immunology 1998;102(1):32-8.
Pedersen 2010 {published data only}
  • Pedersen S, Potter P, Dachev S, Bosheva M, Kaczmarek J, Springer E, et al. Efficacy and safety of three ciclesonide doses vs placebo in children with asthma: the rainbow study. Respiratory Medicine 2010;104(11):1618-28.
Pedersen 2010 b {published data only}
  • Pedersen S, Potter P, Dachev S, Bosheva M, Kaczmarek J, Springer E, et al. Efficacy and safety of three ciclesonide doses vs placebo in children with asthma: the rainbow study. Respiratory Medicine 2010;104(11):1618-28.
Shapiro 1998 {published data only}
  • Shapiro G, Bronsky EA, LaForce CF, Mendelson L, Pearlman D, Schwartz RH, et al. Dose-related efficacy of budesonide administered via a dry powder inhaler in the treatment of children with moderate to severe persistent asthma. Journal of Pediatrics 1998;132(6):976-82.
Shapiro 1998 b {published data only}
  • Shapiro G, Bronsky EA, LaForce CF, Mendelson L, Pearlman D, Schwartz RH. Dose-related efficacy of budesonide administered via a dry powder inhaler in the treatment of children with moderate to severe persistent asthma. J Pediatrics 1998;132(6):976-82.
Shapiro 1998 c {published data only}
  • Shapiro G, Bronsky EA, LaForce CF, Mendelson L, Pearlman D, Schwartz RH. Dose-related efficacy of budesonide administered via a dry powder inhaler in the treatment of children with moderate to severe persistent asthma. J Pediatrics 1998;132(6):976-82.
Shapiro 1998 d {published data only}
  • Shapiro G, Bronsky EA, LaForce CF, Mendelson L, Pearlman D, Schwartz RH. Dose-related efficacy of budesonide administered via a dry powder inhaler in the treatment of children with moderate to severe persistent asthma. J Pediatrics 1998;132(6):976-82.
Skoner 2008 {published data only}
Skoner 2011 {published data only}
  • Skoner DP, Meltzer EO, Milgrom HA, Stryszak P, Teper A, Staudinger H. Effects of inhaled mometasone furoate on growth velocity and adrenal function: a placebo-controlled trial in children 4-9 years old with mild persistent asthma. Journal of Asthma 2011;48(8):848-59.
Skoner 2011 b {published data only}
  • Skoner DP, Meltzer EO, Milgrom HA, Stryszak P, Teper A, Staudinger H. Effects of inhaled mometasone furoate on growth velocity and adrenal function: a placebo-controlled trial in children 4-9 years old with mild persistent asthma. Journal of Asthma 2011;48(8):848-59.
Sorkness 2007 {published data only}
  • Sorkness CA, Lemanske RF Jr, Mauger DT, Boehmer SJ, Chinchilli VM, Martinez FD, et al. Long-term comparison of 3 controller regimens for mild-moderate persistent childhood asthma: the Pediatric Asthma Controller Trial. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2007;119(1):64-72.
Teper 2004 {published data only}
Vaessen-Verberne 2010 {published data only}
  • Vaessen-Verberne AA, van den Berg NJ, van Nierop JC, Brackel HJ, Gerrits GP, Hop WC, et al. Combination therapy salmeterol/fluticasone versus doubling dose of fluticasone in children with asthma. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2010;182(10):1221-7.
Verberne 1998 {published data only}
  • Verberne AA, Frost C, Duiverman EJ, Grol MH, Kerrebijn KF. Addition of salmeterol versus doubling the dose of beclomethasone in children with asthma. The Dutch Asthma Study Group. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 1998;158(1):213-9.
Verberne 1998 b {published data only}
  • Verberne AA, Frost C, Duiverman EJ, Grol MH, Kerrebijn KF. Addition of salmeterol versus doubling the dose of beclomethasone in children with asthma. The Dutch Asthma Study Group. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 1998;158(1):213-9.
Wasserman 2006 {published data only}
  • Wasserman RL, Baker JW, Kim KT, Blake KV, Scott CA, Wu W, et al. Efficacy and safety of inhaled fluticasone propionate chlorofluorocarbon in 2- to 4-year-old patients with asthma: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Annals of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology 2006;96(6):808-18.

References to studies excluded from this review

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Summary of findings
  4. Background
  5. Objectives
  6. Methods
  7. Results
  8. Discussion
  9. Authors' conclusions
  10. Acknowledgements
  11. Data and analyses
  12. Appendices
  13. What's new
  14. Contributions of authors
  15. Declarations of interest
  16. Sources of support
  17. Differences between protocol and review
  18. Characteristics of studies
  19. References to studies included in this review
  20. References to studies excluded from this review
  21. Additional references
Agertoft 2004 {published data only}
  • Agertoft L, Pedersen S. Inhaled ciclesonide does not effect lower leg growth rate or HPA-axis function in children with mild asthma. European Respiratory Journal 2004;24(Suppl 48):377s.
Antoniu 2003 {published data only}
  • Antoniu SA. The START study: when to start to treat with inhaled steroids in asthma?. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research 2003;3(3):223-5.
Apold 1975 {published data only}
  • Apold J, Djoseland O. Inhaled beclomethasone dipropionate in the treatment of childhood asthma. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1975;51(Suppl 4):104-5.
Asrilant 1975 {published data only}
  • Asrilant M. Beclomethasone dipropionate: an aerosol corticosteroid for topical use in bronchial asthma. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1975;51(Suppl 4):79-83.
Bateman 2008 {published data only}
  • Bateman ED, Cheung D, Lapa e Silva J, Gohring UM, Schafer M, Engelstatter R. Randomized comparison of ciclesonide 160 and 640 mug/day in severe asthma. Pulmonary Pharmacology and Therapeutics 2008;21(3):489-98.
Baxter-Jones 1998 {published data only}
  • Baxter-Jones AD, Helms PJ. Effect of 6 month daily treatment with inhaled corticosteroids on lower leg growth in pre-school wheezing children: a pragmatic trial. Thorax 1998;53(Suppl 4):A5 S19.
Berger 2005 {published data only}
  • Berger WE, Qaqundah PY, Blake K, Rodriguez-Santana J, Irani AM, Xu J, et al. Safety of budesonide inhalation suspension in infants aged six to twelve months with mild to moderate persistent asthma or recurrent wheeze. The Journal of Pediatrics 2005;146(1):91-5.
Bernstein 1999 {published data only}
  • Bernstein DI, Berkowitz RB, Chervinsky P, Dvorin DJ, Finn AF, Gross GN, et al. Dose-ranging study of a new steroid for asthma: mometasone furoate dry powder inhaler. Respiratory Medicine 1999;93(9):603-12.
Birkebaek 1995 {published data only}
  • Birkebaek NH, Esberg G, Andersen K, Wolthers O, Hassager C. Bone and collagen turnover during treatment with inhaled dry powder budesonide and beclomethasone dipropionate. Archives of Disease in Childhood 1995;73(6):524-7.
Breborowicz 2005 {published data only}
  • Breborowicz A, Niedziela M. Low risk of adrenal dysfunction in children with severe asthma treated with high dose inhaled glucocorticoids. European Respiratory Journal 2005;26(Suppl 49SP):Abstract No. 1058.
Brook 1998 {published data only}
Brown 1973 {published data only}
Chuchalin 2008 {published data only}
  • Chuchalin A, Jacques L, Frith L. Salmeterol/fluticasone propionate via Diskus[trademark] once daily versus fluticasone propionate twice daily in patients with mild asthma not previously receiving maintenance corticosteroids. Clinical Drug Investigation 2008;28(3):169-81.
Dickson 1973 {published data only}
Ferguson 2002 {published data only}
  • Ferguson AC, Van Bever HP, Teper AM, Lasytsya OI, Whitehead PJ. Fluticasone propionate 100µg bd (FP100) has significantly less effect than budesonide 200µg bd (BUD200) on childhood growth over 1 year of treatment in asthmatics. European Respiratory Journal 2002;20(Suppl 38):219s.
Godfrey 1973 {published data only}
Godfrey 1974 {published data only}
Guarnaccia 1996 {published data only}
  • Guarnaccia S, Buzi F, LaGrutta S, Marini S, Laffranchi MG, Brunori A, et al. High dose inhaled corticosteroids (IC) in children with asthma: influence on bone metabolism. European Respiratory Journal 1996;9(Suppl 23):295s.
Guo 2002 {published data only}
  • Guo JG, Cheng ST. The efficacy of low-dose oral aminophylline combined with inhaled corticosteroid in the treatment of asthmatic children in remission period. Acta Academic Medicine Xuzhou 2002;22(4):349-51.
Gwynn 1977 {published data only}
  • Gwynn CM, Smith JM. Long-term results with beclomethasone dipropionate aerosol in children with bronchial asthma: why does it sometimes fail?. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1977;4(Suppl 3):269S-271S.
Hansel 2006 {published data only}
  • Hansel TT, Benezet O, Kafe H, Ponitz HH, Cheung D, Engelstatter R, et al. A multinational, 12-week, randomized study comparing the efficacy and tolerability of ciclesonide and budesonide in patients with asthma. Clinical Therapeutics 2006;28(6):906-20.
Kaiser 2008 {published data only}
  • Kaiser H, Parasuraman B, Boggs R, Miller CJ, Leidy NK, O'Dowd L. Onset of effect of budesonide and formoterol administered via one pressurized metered-dose inhaler in patients with asthma previously treated with inhaled corticosteroids. Annals of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology 2008;101(3):295-303.
Karpel 2007 {published data only}
  • Karpel JP, Nayak A, Lumry W, Craig TJ, Kerwin E, Fish JE, et al. Inhaled mometasone furoate reduces oral prednisone usage and improves lung function in severe persistent asthma. Respiratory Medicine 2007;101(3):628-37.
Kemp 2004 {published data only}
  • Kemp JP, Osur S, Shrewsbury SB, Herje NE, Duke SP, Harding SM, et al. Potential effects of fluticasone propionate on bone mineral density in patients with asthma: a 2-year randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2004;79(4):458-66.
Lang 2013 {published data only}
  • Lang JE, Dozor AJ, Holbrook JT, Mougey E, Krishnan S, Sweeten S, et al. Biologic mechanisms of environmental tobacco smoke in children with poorly controlled asthma: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice 2013;1(2):172-180.e2.
Laursen 1986 {published data only}
  • Laursen LC, Taudorf E, Weeke B. High-dose inhaled budesonide in treatment of severe steroid-dependent asthma. European Journal of Respiratory Diseases 1986;68(1):19-28.
Lipworth 1996 {published data only}
Lovera 1975 {published data only}
  • Lovera J, Collins-Williams C, Bailey J. Beclomethasone dipropionate by aerosol in the treatment in asthmatic children. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1975;51(Suppl 4):96-8.
McAllen 1974 {published data only}
  • McAllen MK, Kochanowski SJ, Shaw KM. Steroid aerosols in asthma: an assessment of betamethasone valerate and a 12-month study of patients on maintenance treatment. British Medical Journal 1974;1(900):171-5.
Neffen 2006 {published data only}
  • Neffen H, Ruff M, Zhang P, Lloyd M, Banjeri D. Ciclesonide administered once daily has no effect on skeletal maturity in prepubertal children with mild persistent asthma [Abstract]. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2006;117(2):184.
Nelson 2000 {published data only}
  • Nelson HS, Kane RE, Petillo J, Banerji D, Anolik R, Bosso J, et al. Long-term safety of a non-chlorofluorocarbon-containing triamcinolone acetonide inhalation aerosol in patients with asthma. Journal of Asthma 2000;37(2):145-52.
Niu 1998 {published data only}
Otsuki 2009 {published data only}
  • Otsuki M, Eakin MN, Rand CS, Butz AM, Hsu VD, Zuckerman IH, et al. Adherence feedback to improve asthma outcomes among inner-city children: a randomized trial. Pediatrics 2009;124(6):1513-21.
Pearlman 2005 {published data only}
  • Pearlman DS, Berger WE, Kerwin E, LaForce C, Kundu S, Banerji D. Once-daily ciclesonide improves lung function and is well tolerated by patients with mild-to-moderate persistent asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2005;116(6):1206-12.
Pedeersen 2003 {published data only}
  • Pedeersen S, Agertoft L, Lee T, Staudinger H. Lower-leg growth in children with asthma during treatment with inhaled corticosteroids. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2003;111(2 Suppl):S269.
Pedersen 2002 {published data only}
  • Pedersen S, Warner J, Wahn U, Staab D, Le Bourgeois M, Van Essen-Zandvliet E, et al. Growth, systemic safety, and efficacy during 1 year of asthma treatment with different beclomethasone dipropionate formulations: an open-label, randomized comparison of extrafine and conventional aerosols in children. Pediatrics 2002;109(6):e92.
Peroni 2005 {published data only}
  • Peroni DG, Piacentini GL, Bodini A, Ress M, Costella S, Boner AL. Montelukast versus formoterol as second-line therapy in asthmatic children exposed to relevant allergens. Allergy and Asthma Proceedings 2005;26(4):283-6.
Phipatanakul 2003 {published data only}
  • Phipatanakul W, Greene C, Downes SJ, Cronin B, Eller TJ, Schneider LC, et al. Montelukast improves asthma control in asthmatic children maintained on inhaled corticosteroids. Annals of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology 2003;91(1):49-54.
Pines 1973 {published data only}
Skoner 2000 {published data only}
  • Skoner DP, Szefler SJ, Welch M, Walton-Bowen K, Cruz-Rivera M, Smith JA. Longitudinal growth in infants and young children treated with budesonide inhalation suspension for persistent asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2000;105(2 Pt 1):259-68.
Skoner 2006 {published data only}
  •  Skoner D, Maspero J, Kundu S, Lloyd M, Banerji D. Ciclesonide administered once daily has no effect on growth velocity in prepubertal children with mild persistent asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2006;117(2 Suppl 1):S11.
Skoner 2010 {published data only}
Szefler 2008 {published data only}
  • Szefler SJ, Mitchell H, Sorkness CA, Gergen PJ, O'Connor GT, Morgan WJ, et al. Management of asthma based on exhaled nitric oxide in addition to guideline-based treatment for inner-city adolescents and young adults: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008;372(9643):1065-72.
Thompson 1998 {published data only}
  • Thompson PJ, Davies RJ, Young WF, Grossman AB, Donnell D. Safety of hydrofluoroalkane-134a beclomethasone dipropionate extrafine aerosol. Respiratory Medicine 1998;92(Suppl A):33-9.
Turpeinen 2008 {published data only}
  • Turpeinen M, Nikander K, Pelkonen AS, Syvänen P, Sorva R, Raitio H, et al. Daily versus as-needed inhaled corticosteroid for mild persistent asthma (the Helsinki early intervention childhood asthma study). Archives of Disease in Childhood 2008;93(8):654-9.
Visser 2001 {published data only}
  • Visser MJ, Postma DS, Arends LR, de Vries TW, Duiverman EJ, Brand PL. One-year treatment with different dosing schedules of fluticasone propionate in childhood asthma. Effects on hyperresponsiveness, lung function, and height. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2001;164(11):2073-7.
Visser 2001a {published data only}
  • Visser MJ, Duiverman EJ, Postma DS, Arends LR, Brand PLP. High doses of inhaled fluticasone propionate dose-dependently suppress adrenal cortical function in asthmatic children. European Respiratory Journal 2001;18(Suppl 33):290s.
Visser 2004 {published data only}
  • Visser MJ, van der Veer E, Postma DS, Arends LR, de Vries TW, Brand PLP, et al. Side-effects of fluticasone in asthmatic children: no effects after dose reduction. European Respiratory Journal 2004;24(3):420-5.
Wasserman 1996 {published data only}
  • Wasserman SI, Gross GN, Schoenwetter WF, Munk ZM, Kral KM, Schaberg A, et al. A 12-week dose-ranging study of fluticasone propionate powder in the treatment of asthma. Journal of Asthma 1996;33(4):265-74.
Wasserman 1996 b {published data only}
  • Wasserman SI, Gross GN, Schoenwetter WF, Munk ZM, Kral KM, Schaberg A, et al. A 12-week dose-ranging study of fluticasone propionate powder in the treatment of asthma. Journal of Asthma 1996;33(4):265-74.
Waugh 2002 {published data only}
  • Waugh J, Goa KL. Flunisolide HFA. American Journal of Respiratory Medicine 2002;1(5):369-72; discussion 373.
Williams 2010 {published data only}
  • Williams LK, Peterson EL, Wells K, Campbell J, Wang M, Chowdhry VK, et al. A cluster-randomized trial to provide clinicians inhaled corticosteroid adherence information for their patients with asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 2010;126(2):225-231, 231.e1-4.
Wolthers 1995 {published data only}
Xu 2005 {published data only}
  • Xu Z, Chen H-Y, Zhang S-Y, Wang X-L, He C-R, Qiao Y-X. Efficacy and safety of corticosteroid inhalation in the treatment of childhood asthma. Zhongguo Dangdai Erke Zazhi 2005;7(1):47-50.

Additional references

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Summary of findings
  4. Background
  5. Objectives
  6. Methods
  7. Results
  8. Discussion
  9. Authors' conclusions
  10. Acknowledgements
  11. Data and analyses
  12. Appendices
  13. What's new
  14. Contributions of authors
  15. Declarations of interest
  16. Sources of support
  17. Differences between protocol and review
  18. Characteristics of studies
  19. References to studies included in this review
  20. References to studies excluded from this review
  21. Additional references
Adams 2011a
  • Adams NP, Bestall JC, Lasserson TJ, Jones P, Cates CJ. Fluticasone versus placebo for chronic asthma in adults and children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003135.pub4]
Adams 2011b
  • Adams NP, Bestall JB, Malouf R, Lasserson TJ, Jones PW. Inhaled beclomethasone versus placebo for chronic asthma. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002738.pub2]
Adams 2011c
  • Adams NP, Bestall JB, Jones PW. Budesonide versus placebo for chronic asthma in children and adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1999, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003274]
Agertoft 2003
Agertoft 2003a
  • Agertoft L, Pedersen S. Lung deposition and systemic availability of fluticasone Diskus and budesonide Turbuhaler in children. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2003;168:779-82.
Allen 1999
Allen 2002
Allen 2006
  • Allen DB. Effects of inhaled steroids on growth, bone metabolism, and adrenal function. Advances in Pediatrics 2006;53:101-10.
Asher 2010
Barnes 2003
Braman 2006
Brand 2001
BTS 2012
  • British Thoracic Society and Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. British Guideline on the Management of Asthma. A national clinical guideline. May 2008 (revised January 2012). http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDYQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sign.ac.uk%2Fpdf%2Fsign101.pdf&ei=qN_nUY3DPIem4gTc6IDoBQ&usg=AFQjCNFZSipqqDue5MN9iBKrWV1MoM4gxg&sig2=K4MXf4g8R4xKCs45kBiI-g&bvm=bv.49478099,d.bGE (accessed 20 June 2012).
CAMP Research Group 2000
CAMP Research Group 2012
  • Kelly HW, Sternberg AL, Lescher R, Fuhlbrigge AL, Williams P, Zeiger RS. Effect of inhaled glucocorticoids in childhood on adult height. The New England Journal of Medecine 2012;367:904-12.
Carlsen 2002
Chauhan 2012
  • Chauhan BF, Ducharme FM. Anti-leukotriene agents compared to inhaled corticosteroids in the management of recurrent and/or chronic asthma in adults and children. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 5. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002314.pub3]
Covar 2003
  • Covar RA, Szefler SJ, Martin RJ, Sundstrom DA, Silkoff PE, Murphy J, et al. Relations between exhaled nitric oxide and measures of disease activity among children with mild-to-moderate asthma. Journal of Pediatrics 2003;142(5):469-75.
Creese 2001
  • Creese KH, Doull IJ. Effects of inhaled corticosteroids on growth in asthmatic children. Current Allergy and Asthma Reports 2001;1(2):122-6.
Efthimiou 1998
FDA 1998
  • US Food, Drug Administration (FDA). FDA requires new pediatric labelling for inhaled, intranasal corticosteroids. FDA Talk Paper. November 9, 1998.
GINA 2014
  • Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA). From the Global Strategy for Asthma Management and Prevention, Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) 2014. http://www.ginasthma.org/local/uploads/files/GINA_Report_2014.pdf 2014.
Guilbert 2006a
  • Guilbert TW, Morgan WJ, Zeiger RS, Mauger DT, Boehmer SJ, Szefler SJ. Long-term inhaled corticosteroids in preschool children at high risk for asthma. The New England Journal of Medecine 2006;354:1985-97.
Higgins 2008
  • Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration. www.cochrane-handbook.org, 2008.
ISAAC 1998
  • ISAAC Steering Committee. Worldwide variations in the prevalence of asthma symptoms: the International Studyof Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC). European Respiratory Journal 1998;12:315-35.
Juniper 1990
  • Juniper EF, Kline PA, Vanzieleghem MA, Ramsdale EH, O'Byrne PM, Hargreave FE. Effect of long-term treatment with an inhaled corticosteroid (budesonide) on airway hyperresponsiveness and clinical asthma in nonsteroid-dependent asthmatics. American Review of Respiratory Disease 1990;142(4):832-6.
Lai 2009
  • Lai C, Beasley R, Crane J, Foliaki S, Shah J, Weiland S. Global variation in the prevalence and severity of asthma symptoms: Phase Three of the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC). Thorax 2009;64(6):476-83.
Lougheed 2012
  • Lougheed MD, Lemiere C, Ducharme FM, Licskai C, Del SD, Rowe BH, et al. Canadian Thoracic Society 2012 guideline update. Diagnosis and management of asthma in preschoolers, children and adults. Canadian Respiratory Journal 2012;19(2):127–64.
Martin 2002
  • Martin RJ, Szefler SJ, Chinchilli VM, Kraft M, Dolovich M, Boushey HA, et al. Systemic effect comparisons of six inhaled corticosteroid preparations. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2002;165:1377-83.
Masoli 2004
NHLBI 2007
  • National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma (EPR-3). http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/asthma/ (accessed 20 June 2011).
NHLBI Expert Panel Report 2012
  • Expert Panel Report 2007. Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Asthma [National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institute of Health]. www.nhlbi.nih.gov.clinical practice guidelines (accessed 10 December 2012).
Olivieri 1997
  • Olivieri D, Chetta A, Del Donno M, Bertorelli G, Casalini A, Pesci A, et al. Effect of short-term treatment with low-dose inhaled fluticasone propionate on airway inflammation and remodeling in mild asthma: a placebo-controlled study. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 1997;155(6):1864-71.
Pedersen 2001
Price 2002a
  • Price J, Hindmarsh P, Hughes S, Efthimiou J. Evaluating the effects of asthma therapy on childhood growth: what can be learnt from the published literature?. European Respiratory Journal 2002;19:1179-93.
Review Manager 5 [Computer program]
  • Copenhagen, The Nordic Cochrane Centre: The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.0. Copenhagen, The Nordic Cochrane Centre: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
Salvatoni 2003
  • Salvatoni A, Piantanida E, Nosetti L, Nespoli L. Inhaled corticosteroids in childhood asthma: long-term effects on growth and adrenocortical function. Paediatric Drugs 2003;5(6):351-61.
Sharek 2000a
Sharek 2000b
Simons 1997
  • Simons FER and Canadian Beclomethasone Dipropionate-Salmeterol Xinafoate Study Group. A comparison of beclomethasone, salmeterol, and placebo in children with asthma. The New England Journal of Medicine 1997;337:1659-65.
Sizonenko 2002
  • Sinonenko PC. Effects of inhaled or nasal glucocorticosteroids on adrenal function and growth. Journal of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism 2002;15(1):5-26.
Skonner 2011
  • Skoner DP, Meltzer EO, Milgrom H, Stryszak P, Teper A, Staudinger H. Effects of inhaled mometasone furoate on growth velocity and adrenal function: a placebo-controlled trial in children 4-9 years old with mild persistent asthma. The Journal of Asthma 2011;48:848-59.
Sobande 2008
Suissa 2000
US FDA 2007
  • Guidance for industry orally inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids: evaluation of the effects on growth in children, 2007. http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/index.htm.
Van Essen-Zandvliet 1992
  • Van Essen-Zandvliet EE, Hughes MD, Waalkens HJ, Duiverman EJ, Pocock SJ, Kerrebijn KF. Effects of 22 months of treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and/or beta-2-agonists on lung function, airway responsiveness,and symptoms in children with asthma. American Review of Respiratory Disease 1992;146(3):547-54.
Van Rensen 1999
  • Van Rensen EL, Straathof KC, Veselic-Charvat MA, Zwinderman AH, Bel EH, Sterk PJ. Effect of inhaled steroids on airway hyperresponsiveness, sputum eosinophils, and exhaled nitric oxide levels in patients with asthma. Thorax 1999;54(5):403-8.
Witzmann 2000
Wolthers 2001
  • Wolthers O, Hansen M, Juul A, Nielsen HK, Pedersen S. Knemometry, urine cortisol excretion and measures of the insulin-like growth factor axis and collagen turnover in the assessment of systemic activity of inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth. Pediatric Research 1997;41:44-50.
Zhang 2011
  • Zhang L, Axelsson I, Prietsch SOM. Inhaled corticosteroids in children with persistent asthma: effects on growth. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 12. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009471]