ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2007
Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic evaluation of urinary cortisol suppression after inhalation of fluticasone propionate and mometasone furoate.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mometasone furoate in the management of asthma: a review.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2008Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimFluticasone propionate (FP) and mometasone furoate (MF) are inhaled corticosteroids that possess a high ratio of topical to systemic activity. The systemic bioavailability of MF has been claimed to be minimal (1%). FP has been shown to exhibit the same degree of systemic effects, but its systemic availability is between 13 and 17%. We hypothesize that FP and MF have comparable systemic availabilities that can explain their potential to cause systemic effects.
methodsSteady-state FP and MF trough plasma samples were determined from a clinical study by Fardon et al. in patients with persistent asthma (forced expiratory volume in 1 s = 91%). The percent plasma protein binding of FP and MF was measured using ultracentrifugation. Free FP plasma concentrations were normalized for their differences in receptor binding affinity compared with MF and linked to overnight urinary cortisol/creatinine with an inhibitory E(max).
resultsA plot of steady-state FP and MF total trough plasma concentrations vs. dose showed that both drugs exhibit dose linearity. MF has comparable bioavailability to FP based on the steady-state concentrations observed for the different doses. The free plasma concentration producing 50% of urinary cortisol suppression (IC(50)) for MF was not statistically different from the free, normalized IC(50) for FP.
conclusionFP and MF have similar pulmonary deposition and the same potential to cause systemic side-effects due to their similar IC(50) values. The observed urinary cortisol suppression of FP and MF is in agreement with their systemic availability, their differences in plasma protein binding and receptor binding affinity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.