English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We would like to clarify some points about the DIFFUSE (Defining fluticasone propionate/ formoterol particulate size) study (December 2013, p 39) [1] in light of the recent review by De Maria and colleagues [2]. Our in vitro study assessed the effects of inhalation flow rate on the aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) of fluticasone propionate/formoterol pMDI (FP/FORM; flutiform , Jagotec AG, Muttenz, Switzerland) compared with three other ICS/LABA combinations: fluticasone propionate/salmeterol DPI (FP/SAL; Seretide Accuhaler , GlaxoOperations UK Ltd, Herts, UK), budesonide/formoterol DPI (BUD/FORM; Symbicort Turbohaler , AstraZeneca AB, Södertälje, Sweden) and beclometasone dipropionate/formoterol pMDI (BDP/FORM; Foster, Chiesi Farmaceutici S.p.A, Parma, Italy) [1]. Contrary to the suggestions in the review, the patient information leaflets for FP/FORM and BDP/FORM do not specify a flow rate or ‘a long breath’ [3, 4]. Inhalation flow rates of 30–60 L/min are recognised as ‘clinically effective’ for pMDIs and DPIs, according to the In-Check DIAL [5]. pMDIs are active aerosols with relatively low resistance, and patients often use them at flow rates [30 L/min [6–8]. Hence, the flow rate dependency of inhalers is of interest to physicians as well as regulators. Including a faster flow rate of 60 L/min in our study was therefore appropriate, and is relevant to the real-life use of these inhalers. All inhalers were tested across pre-defined parameters, using the same apparatus and the same ambient conditions, to ensure a fair and appropriate comparison. The review questions the use of an Andersen Cascade Impactor (ACI): an ACI is arguably the most widely used tool for testing inhalers, and is routinely used at flow rates of 30, 60 L/min, and above [9–14]. Indeed, the authors of the review have themselves used B. Johal (&) Mundipharma Research Limited, Cambridge Science Park, Milton Road, Cambridge CB4 0GW, UK e-mail: Baljinder.Johal@mundipharma-rd.eu

Letter in Response to the Review by De Maria et al. 2014