Skip to main content
 

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Association for Respiratory Care
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
American Association for Respiratory Care

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Editor's Commentary
    • Coming Next Month
    • Archives
    • Most-Read Papers of 2021
  • Authors
    • Author Guidelines
    • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Information
    • Create Reviewer Account
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Original Research
    • Reviewer Guidelines: Reviews
    • Appreciation of Reviewers
  • CRCE
    • Through the Journal
    • JournalCasts
    • AARC University
    • PowerPoint Template
  • Open Forum
    • 2022 Call for Abstracts
    • 2021 Abstracts
    • Previous Open Forums
  • Podcast
    • English
    • Español
    • Portugûes
    • 国语
  • Videos
    • Video Abstracts
    • Author Interviews
    • Highlighted Articles
    • The Journal
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
EditorialEditorials

Is Extended-Release Guaifenesin No Better Than a Placebo?

Oisin J O'Connell
Respiratory Care May 2014, 59 (5) 788-789; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.03319
Oisin J O'Connell
Department of Respiratory Medicine Cork University Hospital University College Cork Cork, Ireland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
  • Article
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

In this issue of Respiratory Care, Hoffer-Schaefer et al1 report the results of a double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial examining the effects of guaifenesin on both the volume and physical properties of sputum in patients with acute respiratory tract infections (RTIs). Guaifenesin has been marketed as an FDA-approved over-the-counter (OTC) expectorant medication with annual sales of approximately $135 million in the United States. There is currently a paucity of data suggesting that guaifenesin is an effective expectorant, mucolytic, or cough suppressant. Hoffer-Schaefer et al1 report the effects of two 600-mg extended-release guaifenesin tablets taken twice daily on sputum volume and sputum properties in adolescents and adults with acute RTIs.

In its natural healthy state, the lung produces mucus on a continuous basis to clear airways, to entrap bacteria and viruses, and to maintain airway hydration. Sputum refers to the expectorated sample of retained mucus in combination with bacteria and inflammatory cells from within the lung and is a manifestation of underlying lung inflammation and infection. There is an increasing understanding of the complexity of the physics of mucus production, transport, and clearance from within the bronchial tree.2 This clearance of mucus from the lung is dependent on a number of factors, including the rheological properties of the mucus, airway wall factors, and the physical interactions between the mucus and the airway wall.

Elasticity and viscosity are two of the critical properties of sputum rheology. Elasticity is the ability of a material to return to its original shape after deformation; for example, a rubber ball is highly elastic, whereas clay is plastic. Viscosity is a material's resistance to flow. Honey has a high viscosity and is difficult to pour out of a glass, whereas water has a low viscosity and flows more easily. Mucus is an example of a non-Newtonian fluid, meaning that it has both viscous and elastic properties.

Mucus is generally cleared by ciliary motion and is dependent on factors such as the volume and composition of the mucus, adequate periciliary liquid volume, and ciliary beat frequency. This balance can be upset during RTIs, resulting in the overproduction of particular mucins (notably MUC5AC and MUC5B) and other large polymers within the secretions, including deoxyribonucleic acid, filamentous actin, proteoglycans, and biofilms.3

Coughing represents a high-stress high-velocity reflex and so has a direct relationship with viscosity but an inverse relationship with elasticity, meaning that it is easier to expectorate large amounts of viscous mucus than small amounts of elastic mucus.4 This is akin to squirting out honey from an inverted full plastic bottle with a single shake compared with one with a small smear of honey along its wall. On the other hand, mucus clearance is a low-stress high-frequency force applied by cilia to the airway secretions. This force has a direct relationship with the elasticity of the substance being moved and has an indirect relationship with the viscosity of the fluid. Therefore, there are factors favoring mucus clearance from the lung such as a thin mucus layer, high mucus elasticity, and low mucus viscosity,4 whereas a thick mucus layer, low mucus elasticity, and high mucus viscosity favor clearance through coughing.4 Following these principles, the ability of a drug to improve airway clearance is partially dependent on whether the secretions are in the main airways, in which case a drug that enhances cough is preferable. If the mucus obstruction is in the more distal airways, a drug that enhances mucus clearance is preferable.4

There are over 50 commercialized compounds purported to have beneficial effects on mucus or its secretion.4 Broadly, these are classified into expectorants (which increase mucin secretion or increase mucus hydration to a volume that is more easily expectorated by coughing; eg, hypertonic saline), mucolytics (which reduce the viscosity of mucus by dissociating the disulfide bonds in mucins through chemical interactions; eg, N-acetylcysteine), mucokinetics (which increase the transportability of mucus by cough; eg, albuterol), and mucoregulators (which reduce mucus hypersecretion; eg, glucocorticosteroids).4–6 There is increasing pressure by the FDA on drug companies to demonstrate proof of efficacy and safety of such medications.7

In this report, Hoffer-Schaefer et al1 report the effects of guaifenesin at a standardized OTC dose on subjective symptomatology and sputum rheology in adolescents and adults with a productive cough from an upper RTI (URTI). The trial is registered (ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT01046136), and the patient-related outcomes pertaining to this study have been reported previously.8 In the patient-related outcome aspect of this study, extended-release guaifenesin was found to have no effect on all 3 patient-related outcome markers analyzed as measured by the Daily Cough and Phlegm Diary, Spontaneous Symptom Severity Assessment score, and the Wisconsin Upper Respiratory Symptom Survey.8 Hoffer-Schaefer et al1 studied 3 physical aspects of sputum, including interfacial tension using a du Noüy ring distraction method, dynamic rheology using a rheometer (AR1500ex, TA Instruments, New Castle, Delaware), and mucus hydration using total sputum weight and percentage hydration. The authors found no difference in any of these 3 sputum properties with guaifenesin compared to a placebo in adolescents and adults with a productive cough secondary to a URTI. A more detailed breakdown of the clinical subtype of URTI relating to the study cohort has been reported previously and highlights that 82% of the expectorated sputum samples were from patients with rhinopharyngitis, whereas only 8.5% of the patients had acute bronchitis.8 One might speculate there is a difference in the pathogenesis, sputum origin, and rheology of expectorated sputum from rhinopharyngitis and acute bronchitis, perhaps suggesting that particular subgroups of RTIs may be more amenable to different classes of expectorants.9 That said, this medication is marketed as an OTC medication for the subgroup of patients studied in this report.

In conclusion, guaifenesin has not been shown in this study to work as an expectorant, as it did not increase the volume of sputum cleared, or as a mucolytic, as it did not alter sputum rheology or the interfacial tension of the sputum, in this cohort of patients compared to a placebo. The FDA's progressive requirements in demonstrating proof of efficacy for new OTC medications is to be commended and suggests that, in time, increased effort should be required to demonstrate efficacy of already available OTC medications that entered the market prior to the current proof-of-efficacy requirements.7,10

Footnotes

  • Correspondence: Oisin J O'Connell MD, Cork University Hospital, Wilton, Cork, Ireland. E-mail: oisinoconnell{at}gmail.com.
  • The author has disclosed no conflicts of interest.

  • See the Original Study on Page 631

  • Copyright © 2014 by Daedalus Enterprises

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Hoffer-Schaefer A,
    2. Rozycki HJ,
    3. Yopp MA,
    4. Rubin BK
    . Guaifenesin has no effect on sputum volume or sputum properties in adolescents and adults with acute respiratory tract infections. Respiratory Care 2014;59(5):631-636.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Voynow JA,
    2. Rubin BK
    . Mucins, mucus, and sputum. Chest 2009;135(2):505-512.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Kesimer M,
    2. Makhov AM,
    3. Griffith JD,
    4. Verdugo P,
    5. Sheehan JK
    . Unpacking a gel-forming mucin: a view of MUC5B organization after granular release. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 2010;298(1):L15-L22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Rogers DF
    . Mucoactive agents for airway mucus hypersecretory diseases. Respir Care 2007:52(9):1176-1193; discussion 1193-1197.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.
    1. O'Connell OJ,
    2. O'Farrell C,
    3. Harrison MJ,
    4. Eustace JA,
    5. Henry MT,
    6. Plant BJ
    . Nebulized hypertonic saline via positive expiratory pressure versus via jet nebulizer in patients with severe cystic fibrosis. Respir Care 2011;56(6):771-775.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Smith SM,
    2. Schroeder K,
    3. Fahey T
    . Over-the-counter (OTC) medications for acute cough in children and adults in ambulatory settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(1):CD001831.
  7. 7.↵
    Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for FDA staff and industry: marketed unapproved drugs–compliance policy guide. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm070290.pdf. Accessed January 2, 2014.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Albrecht H,
    2. Vernon M,
    3. Solomon G
    . Patient-reported outcomes to assess the efficacy of extended-release guaifenesin for the treatment of acute respiratory tract infection symptoms. Respir Res 2012;13:118.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Rubin BK
    . Therapeutic aerosols and airway secretions. J Aerosol Med 1996;9(1):123-130.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    Food and Drug Administration. FDA intends to remove unapproved drugs from market. http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm244852.htm. Accessed January 2, 2014.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Respiratory Care: 59 (5)
Respiratory Care
Vol. 59, Issue 5
1 May 2014
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author

 

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Association for Respiratory Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Is Extended-Release Guaifenesin No Better Than a Placebo?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Association for Respiratory Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Association for Respiratory Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Is Extended-Release Guaifenesin No Better Than a Placebo?
Oisin J O'Connell
Respiratory Care May 2014, 59 (5) 788-789; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.03319

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Is Extended-Release Guaifenesin No Better Than a Placebo?
Oisin J O'Connell
Respiratory Care May 2014, 59 (5) 788-789; DOI: 10.4187/respcare.03319
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

Info For

  • Subscribers
  • Institutions
  • Advertisers

About Us

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Reprints/Permissions

AARC

  • Membership
  • Meetings
  • Clinical Practice Guidelines

More

  • Contact Us
  • RSS
American Association for Respiratory Care

Print ISSN: 0020-1324        Online ISSN: 1943-3654

© Daedalus Enterprises, Inc.

Powered by HighWire