EC Pulmonology and Respiratory Medicine

This short commentary aims at describing some problems of pharmacotherapy, especially with glucocorticoids (GC), in early and late human ontogeny, outlining the necessity of more intense cooperation between health professionals, in order to make more adequate the utilization of pharmacokinetic data in DOHaD paradigm.

Keywords: Glucocorticoids; Ontogeny; Pharmacokinetics

1. Virchow JC. “Guidelines versus clinical practice - which therapy and which device”. Respiratory Medicine 98B (2004): S28-S34.
2. Virchow JC., et al. “Importance of inhaler devices in the management of airway diseases”. Respiratory Medicine 1 (2008): 10-19.
3. Newman SP and Busse WW. “Evolution of dry powder inhaler design, formulation, and performance”. Respiratory Medicine 5 (2002): 293-304.
4. Wieshammer S and Dreyhaupt J. “Dry powder inhalers: which factors determine the frequency of handling errors?” Respiration1 (2008): 18-25.
5. Chapman KR., et al. “Delivery characteristics and patients’ handling of two single-dose dry powder inhalers used in COPD”. International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 6 (2011): 353-363.
6. Clark AR., et al. “The confusing world of dry powder inhalers: It is all about inspiratory pressures, not inspiratory flow rates”. Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery 1 (2020): 1-11.
7. Barrons R., et al. “Inhaler device selection: special considerations in elderly patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease”. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy 13 (2011): 1221-1232.
8. Ninane V., et al. “Usage of inhalation devices in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a Delphi consensus statement”. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery 3 (2014): 313-323.
9. O’Connor BJ. “The ideal inhaler: design and characteristics to improve outcomes”. Respiratory Medicine 98A (2004): S10-S16.
10. Duarte-de-Araujo A., et al. “COPD: misuse of inhaler devices in clinical practice”. International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 14 (2019): 1209-1217.
11. Gustafsson P., et al. “Can patients use all dry powder inhalers equally well?” International Journal of Clinical Practice 149 (2005): 13-18.
12. Lavorini F and Fontana GA. “Inhaler technique and patient’s preference for dry powder inhaler devices”. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery 1 (2014): 1-3.
13. Dal Negro RW., et al. “Instant velocity and consistency of emitted cloud change by the different levels of canister filling with metered dose inhalers (MDIs), but not with soft mist inhalers (SMIs): a bench study”. Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine 12 (2017): 13.
14. Crompton GK. “Problems patients have using pressurized aerosol inhalers”. European Journal of Respiratory Diseases. Supplement 119 (1982): 101-104.
15. Jackson WF. “Inhalers in asthma. The new perspective”. Harwell, Oxfordshire: Clinical Vision Ltd (1995): 1-56.
16. Brocklebank D., et al. “Comparison of effectiveness of inhaler devices in asthma and chronic obstructive airway disease: a systematic review of the literature”. Health Technology Assessment 26 (2001): 1-149.
17. Terzano C. “Dry powder inhaler and the risk of error”. Respiration1 (2008): 14-15.
18. Kruger P., et al. “Inspiratory flow resistance of marketed dry powder inhalers”. European Respiratory Journal 44 (2014): abstract 4635.
19. Haidl P., et al. “Inhalation device requirements for patients’ inhalation maneuvers”. Respiratory Medicine 118 (2016): 65-75.
20. Buttini F., et al. “Effect of flow rate on in vitro aerodynamic performance of Nexthaler in comparison with Diskus and Turbohaler dry powder inhalers”. Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery 2 (2016): 167-178.
21. Dal Negro RW. “Dry powder inhalers and the right things to remember: a concept review”. Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine 1 (2015): 13.
22. Laube BL., et al. “What the pulmonary specialist should know about the new inhalation therapies”. European Respiratory Journal 6 (2011): 1308-1331.
23. Pedersen S., et al. “Influence of inspiratory flow rate upon the effect of a Turbuhaler”. Archives of Disease in Childhood 3 (1990): 308-310.
24. Clark AR., et al. “The confusing world of dry powder inhalers: It is all about inspiratory pressures, not inspiratory flow rates”. Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery 1 (2020): 1-11.
25. Sanders MJ. “Guiding inspiratory flow: Development of the incheck DIAL G16, a tool for improving inhaler technique”. Pulmonary Medicine (2017): 1495867.
26. Weers J and Clark A. “The impact of inspiratory flow rate on drug delivery to the lungs with dry powder inhalers”. Pharmaceutical Research 3 (2017): 507-528.
27. Dal Negro RW., et al. “The contribution of patients’ lung function to the inspiratory airflow rate achievable through a DPIs’ simulator reproducing different intrinsic resistance rates”. Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine 1 (2021): 752.
28. Zierenberg B. “Optimizing the in vitro performance of Respimat”. Journal of Aerosol Medicine 1 (1999): S19-S24.
29. Dalby R., et al. “A review of the development of respimat soft mist inhaler”. International Journal of Pharmaceutics 1-2 (2004): 1-9.
30. Anderson P. “Use of Respimat soft mist inhaler in COPD patients”. International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease 3 (2006): 251-259.
31. Henriet AC., et al. “Respimat, first soft mist inhaler: new perspectives in the management of COPD”. Revue des Maladies Respiratoires 10 (2010): 1141-1149.
32. Dal Negro RW., et al. “The global usability score: a novel comprehensive tool for assessing, ranking, and compare usability of inhalers in patients requiring airway treatments”. Journal of Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine 7 (2017): 2.
33. Dal Negro RW and Povero M. “Usability and cost-of-usability of three dry powder inhalers (DPIs) in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease COPD): may these variables influence the health technology assessment of DPIs?” Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease2 (2016): 12.
34. Dal Negro RW., et al. “Patients’ usability of seven most used dry-powder inhalers in COPD”. Multidisciplinary Respiratory Medicine 14 (2019): 30.
35. Dal Negro RW., et al. “Assessing the global usability of dry powder inhalers: analysis of six devices widely used for asthma”. Journal of Pulmonology and Respiratory Research 7 (2021): 064.
36. Barry PW and O'Callaghan C. “The influence of inhaler selection on efficacy of asthma therapies”. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 7 (2003): 879-923.
37. Anderson P. “Patient preference for and satisfaction with inhaler devices”. European Respiratory Review 96 (2005): 109-116.
38. Schulte M., et al. “Handling of and preferences for available dry powder inhaler systems by patients with asthma and COPD”. Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery 4 (2008): 321-328.
39. van der Palen J., et al. “Preference, satisfaction and errors with two dry powder inhalers in patients with COPD”. Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery 8 (2013): 1023-1031.
40. Chrystyn H. “Do patients show the same level of adherence with all dry powder inhalers?” International Journal of Clinical Practice 149 (2005): 19-25.
41. Franks M and Briggs P. “Use of a cognitive ergonomics approach to compare usability of a multidose dry powder inhaler and a capsule dry powder inhaler: an open label, randomized, controlled study”. Clinical Therapeutics 11 (2005): 1791-1799.
42. Anderson P. “Patient preference for and satisfaction with inhaler devices”. European Respiratory Review 96 (2005): 109-116.
43. Hantulik P., et al. “Usage and usability of one powder inhaler compared to other inhalers at therapy start: an open, non-interventional observational study in Poland and Germany”. Pneumonologia i Alergologia Polska 5 (2015): 365-377.
44. Kozma CM., et al. “Development and validation of a patient satisfaction and preference questionnaire for inhalation devices”. Treatments in Respiratory Medicine 1 (2005): 41-52.
45. Rajan SK and Gogtay JA. “Ease-of-use, preference, confidence, and satisfaction with Revolizer, a novel dry powder inhaler, in an Indian population”. Lung India4 (2014): 366-374.