» Articles » PMID: 9878995

Theophylline. A Review of Its Potential Steroid Sparing Effects in Asthma

Overview
Journal Drugs
Specialty Pharmacology
Date 1999 Jan 8
PMID 9878995
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Unlabelled: Theophylline is generally considered to be a bronchodilatory drug. However, recent pharmacodynamic studies indicate that it has anti-inflammatory effects. It reduced eosinophil survival rates in vitro, and reduced eosinophil accumulation in bronchial tissue in patients with atopic asthma. Theophylline has also been shown to reduce T cell proliferation and accumulation. These changes were mirrored by improved pulmonary function in patients with asthma in studies that evaluated this parameter. Three randomised double-blind studies have evaluated the potential role of theophylline as an anti-inflammatory treatment in patients with asthma not controlled by low doses of inhaled corticosteroids. Patients were randomised to receive low dose theophylline (400 to 750 mg daily) plus low dose inhaled corticosteroids, or an increased dose of inhaled corticosteroids. Clinical pulmonary function improved to the same or a greater extent in patients who received low dose inhaled corticosteroids plus theophylline than in those treated with high dose inhaled corticosteroids plus placebo. Where reported, the dosages of theophylline used in these studies resulted in serum theophylline concentrations of approximately 9 to 10 mg/L. Approximate monthly costs were provided in one study: these were $60 (year and currency not specified) for theophylline plus budesonide 800 micrograms/day, compared with $100 for budesonide 1600 micrograms/day, and $155 for a regimen of budesonide 800 micrograms/day and salmeterol 100 micrograms/day.

Conclusions: Low dose theophylline has been shown to reduce requirements for inhaled corticosteroid therapy in patients with asthma and may reduce overall treatment costs.

Citing Articles

Histone deacetylase 2 (HDAC2) attenuates lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced inflammation by regulating PAI-1 expression.

Fang W, Chen Y, Lin C, Huang H, Yeh H, Chang Y J Inflamm (Lond). 2018; 15:3.

PMID: 29344006 PMC: 5763578. DOI: 10.1186/s12950-018-0179-6.


Theophylline action on primary human bronchial epithelial cells under proinflammatory stimuli and steroidal drugs: a therapeutic rationale approach.

Gallelli L, Falcone D, Cannataro R, Perri M, Serra R, Pelaia G Drug Des Devel Ther. 2017; 11:265-272.

PMID: 28176948 PMC: 5271379. DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S118485.


Theophylline.

Barnes P Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2016; 3(3):725-747.

PMID: 27713276 PMC: 4033977. DOI: 10.3390/ph3030725.


Concurrent oral and inhalation drug delivery using a dual formulation system: the use of oral theophylline carrier with combined inhalable budesonide and terbutaline.

Salama R, Young P, Traini D Drug Deliv Transl Res. 2015; 4(3):256-67.

PMID: 25786880 DOI: 10.1007/s13346-013-0137-z.


Nanosized rods agglomerates as a new approach for formulation of a dry powder inhaler.

Salem H, Abdelrahim M, Eid K, Sharaf M Int J Nanomedicine. 2011; 6:311-20.

PMID: 21383856 PMC: 3044184. DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S14309.


References
1.
Evans D, Taylor D, Zetterstrom O, Chung K, OConnor B, Barnes P . A comparison of low-dose inhaled budesonide plus theophylline and high-dose inhaled budesonide for moderate asthma. N Engl J Med. 1997; 337(20):1412-8. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199711133372002. View

2.
Kraft M, Pak J, Borish L, Martin R . Theophylline's effect on neutrophil function and the late asthmatic response. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1996; 98(2):251-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0091-6749(96)70147-1. View

3.
Sullivan P, Bekir S, Jaffar Z, Page C, Jeffery P, Costello J . Anti-inflammatory effects of low-dose oral theophylline in atopic asthma. Lancet. 1994; 343(8904):1006-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)90127-9. View

4.
Kelloway J, Wyatt R, Adlis S . Comparison of patients' compliance with prescribed oral and inhaled asthma medications. Arch Intern Med. 1994; 154(12):1349-52. View

5.
Vassallo R, Lipsky J . Theophylline: recent advances in the understanding of its mode of action and uses in clinical practice. Mayo Clin Proc. 1998; 73(4):346-54. DOI: 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)63701-4. View