Abstract

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) have had a wild and controversial rollercoaster ride in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). With the success of ICS in asthma and with the advent of the Dutch Hypothesis, suggesting that asthma and COPD had a similar pathogenic origin, there was great hope that ICS would be the saviour for millions of patients suffering from COPD, by palliating symptoms and changing its natural history. Based on this promise, by the mid 1980s, clinicians were routinely recommending ICS therapy to their patients, even though there was an absence of compelling grade A evidence from large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) demonstrating efficacy 1. By the late 1990s, the promise was shattered by the publication of several seminal RCTs that clearly showed that ICS did not modify the rate of decline in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and had only a modest effect on symptoms 2–4. These data re-inforced the notion that COPD was a steroid-resistant state and many leading experts in the field concluded that ICS had no role in COPD, except during exacerbations 5. Ostensibly, ICS were dead and buried. However, the new millennium brought new hope for ICS. Proponents argued that while ICS may not alter the rate of decline in FEV1, it improved patient based outcomes including survival. This optimism was fuelled by several large observational studies and meta-analyses 6–9 that demonstrated a distinct survival benefit for patients who were prescribed ICS. This enthusiasm, however, was dashed in 2007 by the publication of the long-awaited TORCH (TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health) Study, which failed to show an unequivocal survival advantage for patients assigned to a steroid-containing treatment …

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.