Randomized controlled trial of fish oil and montelukast and their combination on airway inflammation and hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction

Sandra Tecklenburg-Lund, Timothy D. Mickleborough, Louise A. Turner, Alyce D. Fly, Joel M. Stager, Gregory Montgomery

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Both fish oil and montelukast have been shown to reduce the severity of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB). The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of fish oil and montelukast, alone and in combination, on airway inflammation and bronchoconstriction induced by eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea (EVH) in asthmatics. Methods: In this model of EIB, twenty asthmatic subjects with documented hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction (HIB) entered a randomized double-blind trial. All subjects entered on their usual diet (pre-treatment, n = 20) and then were randomly assigned to receive either one active 10 mg montelukast tablet and 10 placebo fish oil capsules (n = 10) or one placebo montelukast tablet and 10 active fish oil capsules totaling 3.2 g EPA and 2.0 g DHA (n = 10) taken daily for 3-wk. Thereafter, all subjects (combination treatment; n = 20) underwent another 3-wk treatment period consisting of a 10 mg active montelukast tablet or 10 active fish oil capsules taken daily. Results: While HIB was significantly inhibited (p<0.05) by montelukast, fish oil and combination treatment compared to pre-treatment, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) between treatment groups; percent fall in forced expiratory volume in 1-sec was -18.4±2.1%, -9.3±2.8%, -11.6±2.8% and -10.8±1.7% on usual diet (pre-treatment), fish oil, montelukast and combination treatment respectively. All three treatments were associated with a significant reduction (p<0.05) in FENO, exhaled breathe condensate pH and cysteinyl-leukotrienes, while the fish oil and combination treatment significantly reduced (p<0.05) urinary 9α, 11β-prostaglandin F2 after EVH compared to the usual diet; however, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) in these biomarkers between treatments. Conclusion: While fish oil and montelukast are both effective in attenuating airway inflammation and HIB, combining fish oil with montelukast did not confer a greater protective effect than either intervention alone. Fish oil supplementation should be considered as an alternative treatment for EIB.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere13487
JournalPLoS One
Volume5
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - 2010

Fingerprint

montelukast
bronchoconstriction
Bronchoconstriction
Fish Oils
fish oils
Randomized Controlled Trials
inflammation
Inflammation
Tablets
Capsules
exercise
Therapeutics
Nutrition
placebos
pretreatment
Placebos
Diet
Forced Expiratory Volume
Biomarkers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Randomized controlled trial of fish oil and montelukast and their combination on airway inflammation and hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction. / Tecklenburg-Lund, Sandra; Mickleborough, Timothy D.; Turner, Louise A.; Fly, Alyce D.; Stager, Joel M.; Montgomery, Gregory.

In: PLoS One, Vol. 5, No. 10, e13487, 2010.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tecklenburg-Lund, Sandra ; Mickleborough, Timothy D. ; Turner, Louise A. ; Fly, Alyce D. ; Stager, Joel M. ; Montgomery, Gregory. / Randomized controlled trial of fish oil and montelukast and their combination on airway inflammation and hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction. In: PLoS One. 2010 ; Vol. 5, No. 10.
@article{3c2f0e9d606042528dd09b6086b305ee,
title = "Randomized controlled trial of fish oil and montelukast and their combination on airway inflammation and hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction",
abstract = "Background: Both fish oil and montelukast have been shown to reduce the severity of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB). The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of fish oil and montelukast, alone and in combination, on airway inflammation and bronchoconstriction induced by eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea (EVH) in asthmatics. Methods: In this model of EIB, twenty asthmatic subjects with documented hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction (HIB) entered a randomized double-blind trial. All subjects entered on their usual diet (pre-treatment, n = 20) and then were randomly assigned to receive either one active 10 mg montelukast tablet and 10 placebo fish oil capsules (n = 10) or one placebo montelukast tablet and 10 active fish oil capsules totaling 3.2 g EPA and 2.0 g DHA (n = 10) taken daily for 3-wk. Thereafter, all subjects (combination treatment; n = 20) underwent another 3-wk treatment period consisting of a 10 mg active montelukast tablet or 10 active fish oil capsules taken daily. Results: While HIB was significantly inhibited (p<0.05) by montelukast, fish oil and combination treatment compared to pre-treatment, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) between treatment groups; percent fall in forced expiratory volume in 1-sec was -18.4±2.1{\%}, -9.3±2.8{\%}, -11.6±2.8{\%} and -10.8±1.7{\%} on usual diet (pre-treatment), fish oil, montelukast and combination treatment respectively. All three treatments were associated with a significant reduction (p<0.05) in FENO, exhaled breathe condensate pH and cysteinyl-leukotrienes, while the fish oil and combination treatment significantly reduced (p<0.05) urinary 9α, 11β-prostaglandin F2 after EVH compared to the usual diet; however, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) in these biomarkers between treatments. Conclusion: While fish oil and montelukast are both effective in attenuating airway inflammation and HIB, combining fish oil with montelukast did not confer a greater protective effect than either intervention alone. Fish oil supplementation should be considered as an alternative treatment for EIB.",
author = "Sandra Tecklenburg-Lund and Mickleborough, {Timothy D.} and Turner, {Louise A.} and Fly, {Alyce D.} and Stager, {Joel M.} and Gregory Montgomery",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0013487",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
journal = "PLoS One",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomized controlled trial of fish oil and montelukast and their combination on airway inflammation and hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction

AU - Tecklenburg-Lund, Sandra

AU - Mickleborough, Timothy D.

AU - Turner, Louise A.

AU - Fly, Alyce D.

AU - Stager, Joel M.

AU - Montgomery, Gregory

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Background: Both fish oil and montelukast have been shown to reduce the severity of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB). The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of fish oil and montelukast, alone and in combination, on airway inflammation and bronchoconstriction induced by eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea (EVH) in asthmatics. Methods: In this model of EIB, twenty asthmatic subjects with documented hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction (HIB) entered a randomized double-blind trial. All subjects entered on their usual diet (pre-treatment, n = 20) and then were randomly assigned to receive either one active 10 mg montelukast tablet and 10 placebo fish oil capsules (n = 10) or one placebo montelukast tablet and 10 active fish oil capsules totaling 3.2 g EPA and 2.0 g DHA (n = 10) taken daily for 3-wk. Thereafter, all subjects (combination treatment; n = 20) underwent another 3-wk treatment period consisting of a 10 mg active montelukast tablet or 10 active fish oil capsules taken daily. Results: While HIB was significantly inhibited (p<0.05) by montelukast, fish oil and combination treatment compared to pre-treatment, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) between treatment groups; percent fall in forced expiratory volume in 1-sec was -18.4±2.1%, -9.3±2.8%, -11.6±2.8% and -10.8±1.7% on usual diet (pre-treatment), fish oil, montelukast and combination treatment respectively. All three treatments were associated with a significant reduction (p<0.05) in FENO, exhaled breathe condensate pH and cysteinyl-leukotrienes, while the fish oil and combination treatment significantly reduced (p<0.05) urinary 9α, 11β-prostaglandin F2 after EVH compared to the usual diet; however, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) in these biomarkers between treatments. Conclusion: While fish oil and montelukast are both effective in attenuating airway inflammation and HIB, combining fish oil with montelukast did not confer a greater protective effect than either intervention alone. Fish oil supplementation should be considered as an alternative treatment for EIB.

AB - Background: Both fish oil and montelukast have been shown to reduce the severity of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB). The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of fish oil and montelukast, alone and in combination, on airway inflammation and bronchoconstriction induced by eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea (EVH) in asthmatics. Methods: In this model of EIB, twenty asthmatic subjects with documented hyperpnea-induced bronchoconstriction (HIB) entered a randomized double-blind trial. All subjects entered on their usual diet (pre-treatment, n = 20) and then were randomly assigned to receive either one active 10 mg montelukast tablet and 10 placebo fish oil capsules (n = 10) or one placebo montelukast tablet and 10 active fish oil capsules totaling 3.2 g EPA and 2.0 g DHA (n = 10) taken daily for 3-wk. Thereafter, all subjects (combination treatment; n = 20) underwent another 3-wk treatment period consisting of a 10 mg active montelukast tablet or 10 active fish oil capsules taken daily. Results: While HIB was significantly inhibited (p<0.05) by montelukast, fish oil and combination treatment compared to pre-treatment, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) between treatment groups; percent fall in forced expiratory volume in 1-sec was -18.4±2.1%, -9.3±2.8%, -11.6±2.8% and -10.8±1.7% on usual diet (pre-treatment), fish oil, montelukast and combination treatment respectively. All three treatments were associated with a significant reduction (p<0.05) in FENO, exhaled breathe condensate pH and cysteinyl-leukotrienes, while the fish oil and combination treatment significantly reduced (p<0.05) urinary 9α, 11β-prostaglandin F2 after EVH compared to the usual diet; however, there was no significant difference (p>0.017) in these biomarkers between treatments. Conclusion: While fish oil and montelukast are both effective in attenuating airway inflammation and HIB, combining fish oil with montelukast did not confer a greater protective effect than either intervention alone. Fish oil supplementation should be considered as an alternative treatment for EIB.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78149452849&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78149452849&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0013487

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0013487

M3 - Article

VL - 5

JO - PLoS One

JF - PLoS One

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 10

M1 - e13487

ER -