French multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial on nebulized amiloride in cystic fibrosis patients. The Amiloride-AFLM Collaborative Study Group. Nebulised amiloride in respiratory exacerbations of cystic fibrosis: a randomised controlled trial. Aerosolized amiloride as treatment of cystic fibrosis lung disease: a pilot study. No added benefit from nebulized amiloride in patients with cystic fibrosis. Mucus clearance and lung function in cystic fibrosis with hypertonic saline.
The effect of amiloride, a sodium channel blocker, has been evaluated in a multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial in cystic fibrosis patients more than 5-years-old (n = 137) whose forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV(1)), and forced mid-expiratory flow (FEF(25-75)) were not below 50%, 50%, and 30% of reference values, respectively. Patients were randomly allocated to two parallel groups. Sixty-four patients were chronically colonized with Pseudomonas aeruginosa; they received either amiloride or placebo as a nebulized solution three times daily for 6 months. Routine treatments were continued. Patients chronically colonized with Pseudomonas received nebulized colimycine twice a day for a month during the third and sixth months of treatment. Bronchopulmonary exacerbations were treated in the usual way. The effects of the amiloride treatment were assessed at the end of the 6-month treatment period. The effects on FVC and secondarily on FEV(1), FEF(25-75), the number of days on antibiotic therapy, the Shwachman score, a nutritional index (weight/height(2)), the change in sputum bacterial flora, and nocturnal cough were assessed. For the patients not chronically colonized with Pseudomonas, the effect of the treatment was also evaluated by counting chronic colonizations with pathogens appearing during the trial period. The present study failed to demonstrate any significant benefit of amiloride over placebo on FVC, FEV(1), and the other secondary endpoints in the studied population. Neither the chronically colonized, nor the noncolonized patients benefited. The confidence intervals of the differences between treatment groups indicated small differences that were most likely of no clinical significance. Complementary analyses taking into account the gender, the type of mutation, the subpopulations whose FVC and FEV(1) were below 80% of normal values at the beginning of the study, and also patients less than 10 years old, did not show any statistically or clinically significant improvements following amiloride therapy.
                Copyright 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc. To assess the benefit of nebulised amiloride added to the standard inpatient treatment of a respiratory exacerbation in cystic fibrosis.
                Prospective, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial.
                27 cystic fibrosis patients (mean age 12.8 years).
                Two hospitals in Leeds, UK.
                Both forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) showed improvements over the course of treatment, although there was no difference in respiratory function between the two groups at any of three time periods during the study. The time to reach peak FVC was significantly reduced in the amiloride group (4.2 v 7.6 days; 95% CI 0.4 to 6.4 days), but not in the time to reach peak FEV1 (5.7 v 7.9 days; 95% CI -1.2 to 5.6 days).
                Amiloride did not result in a greater overall improvement in respiratory function. There was a suggestion that it may have an effect on the rate of improvement, and thus may possibly influence the duration of treatment. This hypothesis deserves further evaluation. nan In cystic fibrosis (CF) airway epithelial sodium absorption is increased 2-3 fold. Since sodium absorption is inhibited by the sodium channel blocker amiloride, our aim was to assess its therapeutic benefit in cystic fibrosis. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial of nebulized amiloride was performed in 23 patients with cystic fibrosis. Amiloride or placebo was administered four times daily for two six month periods. Existing treatment was continued, and any infective exacerbations treated in the usual way. Fourteen patients completed the study. No significant changes occurred in forced expiratory volume in one second, forced vital capacity, oxygen saturation, body weight, sputum volume, culture and rheology, serum urea, and electrolytes, white cell count and erythrocyte sedimentation rate during either treatment period. The frequency of infective exacerbations was also not different in either treatment period. We were thus unable to confirm the benefit shown in the only other clinical trial of nebulized amiloride in cystic fibrosis and conclude that, in the presence of established treatment for cystic fibrosis lung disease, nebulized amiloride offers no additional clinical benefit. Abnormal homeostasis of the volume of airway surface liquid in patients with cystic fibrosis is thought to produce defects in mucus clearance and airway defense. Through osmotic forces, hypertonic saline may increase the volume of airway surface liquid, restore mucus clearance, and improve lung function.
                A total of 24 patients with cystic fibrosis were randomly assigned to receive treatment with inhaled hypertonic saline (5 ml of 7 percent sodium chloride) four times daily with or without pretreatment with amiloride. Mucus clearance and lung function were measured during 14-day baseline and treatment periods.
                Long-term inhalation of hypertonic saline without pretreatment with amiloride (i.e., with placebo pretreatment) resulted in a sustained (> or =8 hours) increase in 1-hour rates of mucus clearance, as compared with those with amiloride pretreatment (14.0+/-2.0 vs. 7.0+/-1.5 percent, respectively; P=0.02) and increased 24-hour rates of mucus clearance over baseline. Furthermore, inhalation of hypertonic saline with placebo improved the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) between the baseline period and the treatment period (mean difference, 6.62 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.6 to 11.7; P=0.02), whereas hypertonic saline with amiloride did not improve FEV1 (mean difference, 2.9 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -2.2 to 8.0; P=0.23). Forced vital capacity (FVC), the forced expiratory flow between 25 and 75 percent of FVC (FEF25-75), and respiratory symptoms also significantly improved in patients treated with hypertonic saline and placebo, whereas the residual volume as a proportion of total lung capacity (RV:TLC) did not change in either group. A comparison of the changes in lung function in the two groups showed no significant difference. In vitro data suggested that sustained hydration of airway surfaces was responsible for the sustained improvement in mucus clearance, whereas inhibition of osmotically driven water transport by amiloride accounted for the observed loss of clinical benefit.
                In patients with cystic fibrosis, inhalation of hypertonic saline produced a sustained acceleration of mucus clearance and improved lung function. This treatment may protect the lung from insults that reduce mucus clearance and produce lung disease.
                Copyright 2006 Massachusetts Medical Society.