Advanced search
Publication Cover
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Volume 17, 2017 - Issue 5
Submit an article Journal homepage
191
Views
10
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Treatment plan comparison in acute and chronic respiratory tract diseases: an observational study of doxophylline vs. theophylline

F. S. MenniniEconomic Evaluation and HTA (EEHTA), CEIS, Faculty of Economics, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy;Institute of Leadership and Management in Health - Kingston University London, London, UKView further author information
,
P. SciattellaEconomic Evaluation and HTA (EEHTA), CEIS, Faculty of Economics, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy;Department of Statistical science, “Sapienza”University of Rome, Rome, ItalyView further author information
,
A. MarcellusiEconomic Evaluation and HTA (EEHTA), CEIS, Faculty of Economics, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Rome, Italy;Institute of Leadership and Management in Health - Kingston University London, London, UK;National Research Council (CNR), Institute for Research on Population and Social Policies (IRPPS), Rome, ItalyCorrespondence[email protected]
View further author information
,
A. MarcobelliRegional Health Sevice (ASR) Marche, Ancona, ItalyView further author information
,
A. RussoDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Messina, Messina, ItalyView further author information
&
A. P. CaputiDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Messina, Messina, ItalyView further author information
Pages 503-510 | Received 28 Jul 2016, Accepted 28 Feb 2017, Published online: 15 Mar 2017

References

  • Halbert RJ, Natoli JL, Gano A, et al. Global burden of COPD: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir J. 2006;28:523–532.
  • Gan WQ, FitzGerald JM, Carlsten C, et al. Associations of ambient air pollution with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease hospitalization and mortality. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;187:721–727.
  • Salvi SS, Barnes PJ, Tiruvoipati R, et al. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in nonsmokers. Lancet. 2009;374:733–743.
  • Eisner MD, Anthonisen N, Coultas D, et al. An official American Thoracic Society public policy statement: novel risk factors and the global burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2010;182:693–718.
  • Mannino DM, Buist AS. Global burden of COPD: risk factors, prevalence, and future trends. Lancet. 2007;370:765–773.
  • Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease, Pocket Guide to COPD Diagnosis Management and Prevention, 2017, Report. Available from: http://goldcopd.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/wms-GOLD-2017-Pocket-Guide.pdf
  • Grossi E, Biffignandi P, Franzone JS, et al. Doxophylline: drug profile and review of clinical trials. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 1988;10:1–8.
  • Franzone JS, Cirillo R, Barone D, et al. Doxophylline and theophylline are xanthines with partly different mechanisms of action in animals. Drug Explt Clin Res. 1988;14:479–489.
  • Franzone JS, Cirillo R, Biffignandi P. Doxophylline exerts a prophylactic effect against bronchoconstriction and pleurisy induced by PAF. Eur J Pharmacol. 1989;165:269–277.
  • Bucca C, Rolla G, Fonzo D, et al. Acute clinical-pharmacological findings in obstructive pneumopathy following 2(7, -theophyllinmethyl) 1, 3-dioxolane (doxophylline). Int J Clin Pharm Res. 1982;4:101–103.
  • Melillo G, Balzano G, Jodice F, et al. Treatment of reversible chronic airways obstruction with doxophylline compared with slow-release theophylline: a double-blind, randomized, multicentre trial. Int J Clin Pharm Res. 1989;9:397–405.
  • Dolcetti A, Osella D, Carnuccio C, et al. Study of effects of intravenous use of doxophylline, a new methylxanthine derivative, in the treatment of patients affected by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Minerva Pneumologica. 1988;27:211–215.
  • Goldstein MF, Cherwinsky P. Efficacy and safety of doxophylline compared to theophylline in chronic reversible asthma - a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled multicentre clinical trial. Med Sci Monit. 2002;8:297–304.
  • Dini FL, Cogo R. Doxophylline: a new generation xanthine bronchodilator derived and major cardiovascular side effects. Curr Med Res Opin. 2001;16:258–268.
  • Sacco C, Braghiroli A, Grossi E, et al. The effects of doxophylline versus theophylline on sleep architecture in COPD patients. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 1995;50:98–103.
  • Franzone JS, Cirillo R, Reboani MC. Doxophylline differs from methylxanthines in its movement of cytosolic calcium. Int J Tissue React. 1991;13:131–138.
  • van Mastbergen J, Jolas T, Allegra L, et al. The mechanism of action of doxophylline is unrelated to HDAC inhibition, PDE inhibition or adenosine receptor antagonism. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2012;25:55–61.
  • Page CP. Doxophylline: a “novofylline”. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2010;23:231–234.
  • Cogo R, Castonuovo A. Effects of oral doxophylline on inflammatory changes and altered cell proliferation in chronic obstructive bronchitis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2000;4:15–20.
  • Israel E, Banerjee TR, Fitzmaurice GM, et al. Effects of inhaled glucocorticoids on bone density in pre-menopausal women. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:941–947.
  • Margay SM, Farhat S, Kaur S, et al. To study the efficacy and safety of doxophylline and theophylline in bronchial asthma. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015;9:FC05–FC08.
  • Lal D, Manocha S, Ray A, et al. Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of theophylline and doxofylline in patients with bronchial asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol. 2015;26:443–451.
  • Rajanandh MG, Nageswari AD, Ilango K. Pulmonary function assessment in mild to moderate persistent asthma patients receiving montelukast, doxofylline, and tiotropium with budesonide: a randomized controlled study. Clin Ther. 2014;36:526–533.
  • Wang T, Luo G, Hu Y, et al. Comparative study on the efficacy of tiotropium bromide inhalation and oral doxofylline treatment of moderate to severe stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2011;31:614–618.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.