Skip to content

Pharmacodynamic Bioequivalence of Metered Dose Inhalers of Albuterol Sulfate in Patients With Stable Mild Asthma

Comparison of the Pharmacodynamic Profile of Test and Reference Metered Dose Inhalers (MDIs) Containing Albuterol Sulfate Using Bronchoprovocation in Adult Patients With Stable Mild Asthma

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02584257
Enrollment
217
Registered
2015-10-22
Start date
2016-04-30
Completion date
2016-09-30
Last updated
2020-12-04

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Mild Persistent Asthma

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the pharmacodynamic bioequivalence of the test product to the reference product, using bronchoprovocation (methacholine challenge testing) in adult patients with stable mild asthma.

Detailed description

A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Placebo-Controlled, 5-Treatment, Randomized, Crossover Study to Demonstrate the Pharmacodynamic Bioequivalence of Test and Reference Metered Dose Inhalers containing Albuterol Sulfate using Bronchoprovocation in Adult Patients with Stable Mild Asthma

Interventions

DRUGplacebo ProAir HFA
DRUGLupin albuterol HFA MDI
DRUGplacebo Lupin albuterol HFA MDI

Sponsors

Lupin, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Caregiver)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Male and non-pregnant female subjects (18-65 years of age) * Stable mild asthmatics based on National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) guidelines. * Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second ( FEV1) ≥ 80% of predicted. Airway responsiveness to methacholine demonstrated by a pre-albuterol dose (baseline) PC20 ≤ 8 mg/ml. * Nonsmokers for at least 1 year prior to the study and a maximum smoking history of five pack-years (the equivalent of one pack per day for five years). * Written informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

* Conditions which could alter airway reactivity to methacholine (e.g., pneumonia, upper respiratory tract infection, lower respiratory tract, viral bronchitis and/or sinobronchitis) within six weeks preceding the screening visit. * History of seasonal asthma exacerbations, in which case the patient should be studied outside of the relevant allergen season. * History of cystic fibrosis, bronchiectasis or other respiratory diseases. * History of cardiovascular, renal, neurologic, liver or endocrine dysfunction, or chronic condition that could put the safety of the patient at risk during the study or affect the efficacy and safety analyses during the study. * Treatment in an emergency room, urgent care center, or hospitalization for acute asthmatic symptoms within the past 6 months or need for daily oral corticosteroids within past 3 months. * Known intolerance or hypersensitivity to any component of the albuterol metered dose inhaler (MDI).

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Post-dose PC20 Concentration After Receiving Differing Doses of Test, Reference, or PlaceboPost-dose at Visits 2-6 of the study, a total of approximately 4 weeks.The primary efficacy endpoint was the postdose PC20 following administration of differing doses of albuterol (or placebo) by inhalation. The 20% reduction in FEV1 was determined relative to the saline stage FEV1 measured before albuterol or placebo administration. Additionally, an analysis of superiority to placebo was performed for the T and R products prior to the BE determination. In this study the ITT and PP populations were identical.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Male/female patients 18-65 years of age, inclusive, with a diagnosis of asthma and at least a 6-month history of stable mild asthma as defined by the NAEPP EPR-3 guidelines were recruited and enrolled at 17 different centers in the USA. First subject was screened on April 12th, 2016 and the last patient was completed the study on August 12th, 2016.

Pre-assignment details

Of the 217 patients enrolled in the study, 126 failed screening or were randomization failures, largely due to failure to meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria. 91 Subjects were randomized to treatment groups.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Safety Population
All randomized patients who received a dose of any of the randomized study medications. Patient baseline characteristics are not designated by treatment arms due to the crossover design of the study (treatment groups are not mutually exclusive).
91
Total91

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002FG003FG004FG005FG006FG007FG008
Period 1Withdrawal by Subject000000100
Period 2Adverse Event010000000
Period 2Physician Decision100000000

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicSafety Population
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
91 Participants
Age, Continuous41.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.96
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
American Indian/Alaska Native
0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
1 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black/African American
25 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Hispanic/Latino
3 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Not Hispanic/Latino
88 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
2 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
63 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
91 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
54 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
37 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
EG003
affected / at risk
EG004
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 890 / 900 / 890 / 880 / 89
other
Total, other adverse events
3 / 894 / 901 / 898 / 881 / 89
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 890 / 900 / 890 / 880 / 89

Outcome results

Primary

Post-dose PC20 Concentration After Receiving Differing Doses of Test, Reference, or Placebo

The primary efficacy endpoint was the postdose PC20 following administration of differing doses of albuterol (or placebo) by inhalation. The 20% reduction in FEV1 was determined relative to the saline stage FEV1 measured before albuterol or placebo administration. Additionally, an analysis of superiority to placebo was performed for the T and R products prior to the BE determination. In this study the ITT and PP populations were identical.

Time frame: Post-dose at Visits 2-6 of the study, a total of approximately 4 weeks.

Population: Intent-to-Treat population included all randomized patients who completed at least 2 treatment periods with valid PC20 FEV1 measurements.Treatment was assigned based upon treatment to which patients had been randomized regardless of which treatment they actually received. This was primary population for comparisons of T and R products to placebo.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Placebo DosePost-dose PC20 Concentration After Receiving Differing Doses of Test, Reference, or Placebo0.608 log(mg/mL)Standard Error 0.239
90 mcg ProAir HFAPost-dose PC20 Concentration After Receiving Differing Doses of Test, Reference, or Placebo3.779 log(mg/mL)Standard Error 0.238
180 mcg ProAir HFAPost-dose PC20 Concentration After Receiving Differing Doses of Test, Reference, or Placebo4.432 log(mg/mL)Standard Error 0.238
90 mcg Lupin Albuterol HFA MDIPost-dose PC20 Concentration After Receiving Differing Doses of Test, Reference, or Placebo3.928 log(mg/mL)Standard Error 0.241
180 mcg Lupin Albuterol HFA MDIPost-dose PC20 Concentration After Receiving Differing Doses of Test, Reference, or Placebo4.481 log(mg/mL)Standard Error 0.24
p-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.732, 3.61]Brief Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: <0.000195% CI: [3.384, 4.263]Brief Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: <0.000195% CI: [2.876, 3.764]Brief Mixed Models Analysis
p-value: <0.000195% CI: [3.43, 4.315]Brief Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: An Emax model was developed and the 90% confidence interval of Frel was a bias corrected accelerated confidence interval based on a bootstrapping procedure. The bootstrapping procedure used for this analysis was residual resampling. The Per-Protocol population was the primary population for bioequivalence analysis. Patients in the PP population must have completed at least 2 treatment periods with valid PC20FEV1 measurements and had no major protocol deviations within those intervals.90% CI: [0.93, 1.48]

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026