Premium
Dyphylline Versus Theophylline: A Double‐Blind Comparative Evaluation
Author(s) -
FURUKAWA CLIFTON T.,
SHAPIRO GAIL G.,
PIERSON WILLIAM E.,
BIERMAN C. WARREN
Publication year - 1983
Publication title -
the journal of clinical pharmacology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.92
H-Index - 116
eISSN - 1552-4604
pISSN - 0091-2700
DOI - 10.1002/j.1552-4604.1983.tb01784.x
Subject(s) - theophylline , placebo , bronchospasm , medicine , anesthesia , bronchodilator , asthma , double blind , pharmacology , pathology , alternative medicine
This study was a randomized double‐blind evaluation of three doses of dyphylline, theophylline, and placebo for blocking exercise‐induced bronchospasm (EIB). Twenty patients aged 12 to 17 years took one of the following on five separate days prior to an exercise challenge: 10,15, or 20 mg/kg dyphylline; 6 mg/kg anhydrous theophylline; or placebo. Linear relationships were found between the log of dyphylline doses and per cent changes from baseline for PEFR, FEV 1 and FEF 25–75% . The 15 and 20 mg/kg doses differed significantly from placebo in preventing declines in PEFR, FEV 1 , and FEF 26–75% . While significant, these changes were one half to one third those found with 6 mg/kg theophylline. Tremor was twice as common with theophylline. While dyphylline has therapeutic effectiveness compared to placebo for blocking EIB, its benefit is small. Further evaluations are needed to elucidate optimal dosaging for maximal effectiveness.