From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Pharmacology (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


Can we please remove the list of clinical trials. This is an encyclopedia, not a meta-analysis. JFW | T@lk 20:24, 10 May 2005 (UTC)


Just an FYI for those who watch this article, fluticasone propionate is one of the two active ingredients in Advair (Fluticasone/salmeterol).


It would be nice if somebody could detail the situation by which the Flovent MDI inhaler is now off patent, but GSK removed the Flovent MDI product from the market and replaced it with the Flovent HFA inhaler. Since the CFC-containing MDI inhalers are being phased out, perhaps generic drug makers beleaved that they would not be able to receive approval. This is unfortunate, because consumers do not have the lower-cost generic option for this long-term medication like they do with generic albuterol inhalers (which server a different function).

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 17:39, 23 August 2006


Where is fluticasone sold as Beconase? At least here in the US, Beconase is beclomethasone.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 09:40, 22 September 2006
Agree likewise so in UK. "Beconae" was added in this edit. I have removed it for now. David Ruben Talk 13:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
That addition was mine: in Australia, two preparations of Beconase are sold: a "12 hour" version containing beclomethasone dipropionate, and a "24 hour" version with fluticasone propionate. Ben White 00:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
In Australia, formulated fluticasone propionate is sold as "Beconase allergy". "Beconase" contains only beclomethasone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


If anybody wants to know the mechanism, Please refer to the following article:

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004 Aug;114(2):296-301 Fluticasone propionate increases CD4CD25 T regulatory cell suppression of allergen-stimulated CD4CD25 T cells by an IL-10-dependent mechanism. Dao Nguyen X, Robinson DS. PMID 15316506

—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) (18:51, 17 October 2006
Yet note that this only a possible mechanism - as the abstract states "CONCLUSION: Increased suppression by CD4+CD25+ T cells might play a role in anti-inflammatory effects of corticosteroids in asthma and allergic diseases" David Ruben Talk 22:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe the place for addressing the possible mechinisms (+ side effects) of inhaled corticosteroids should be via a link - having seperate explanations for every distinct drug is inefficient.

the only distinct difference that I am aware of with fluticasone is that it has less systemic absorbtion than the other inhaled steroids, theoretically decreasing the incidence of growth supression and supression of the adrenocorticoid axis. I have not put this in the article as I do not have a good reference off the top of my head. Whyso 14:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Well I believe that side effects should remain, because they are a central issue of any medical drug wiki should inform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:55, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


the article states: "It is marketed with the brand name Flixotide and Flixonase by Allen & Hanburys and Flovent and Flonase by GlaxoSmithKline.". But I have a bottle here (New Zealand) called Flixonase (TM), and it is made by GlaxoSmithKline and even says Flixonase and the logo are are trademarks of GlaxoSmithKline. Did gsk buy out Allen & Hanburys? or is this just wrong? Onco_p53 10:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes. No. Axl 13:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Urgent correction[edit]

I'm not knowledgeable enough about the markup language to do this myself. This page is about "fluticasone" and the structure is correctly depicted.

However, all the drug products mentioned: Flonase, Flixotide, Flixonase, Cutivate, etc. use "fluticasone propionate". Fluticasone and fluticasone propionate are different chemical entities; the latter has the tertiary hydroxyl propiolated.

As far as I know, there are no drug products out there using fluticasone. Quite often "fluticasone propionate" is referred to as "fluticasone" in shorthand, which is where the confusion arises. Now there is also "fluticasone furoate" which has the tertiary hydroxyl furoylated. 02:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I am fairly certain the Structure is wrong. A search for CAS# 90566-53-3 on emolecules leads to a compound that looks like this. Either the CAS is wrong or the molecule depicted is not Futicasone. Please don't use this image as i have copied it directly from emolecules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:38, 2 May 2017 (UTC)


I've split this into three different articles for each of the chemicals involved. This should make everything clearer... LSD (talk) 04:03, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Moved from article[edit]

I have moved the following content here because it lacks context/explanation. If anyone wants to use it to improve the article, here it is. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:50, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

[[File:Fluticasone synthesis.svg|thumb|center|700px|Fluticasone synthesis<ref>{{Cite journal | doi = 10.1021/jm00048a008| title = Synthesis and Structure-Activity Relationships in a Series of Antiinflammatory Corticosteroid Analogs, Halomethyl Androstane-17.beta.-carbothioates and -17.beta.-carboselenoates| journal = Journal of Medicinal Chemistry| volume = 37| issue = 22| pages = 3717| year = 1994| last1 = Phillipps | first1 = G. H. | last2 = Bailey | first2 = E. J. | last3 = Bain | first3 = B. M. | last4 = Borella | first4 = R. A. | last5 = Buckton | first5 = J. B. | last6 = Clark | first6 = J. C. | last7 = Doherty | first7 = A. E. | last8 = English | first8 = A. F. | last9 = Fazakerley | first9 = H. }}</ref>]]

Please read this and update page.[edit]

Sorry do not have skills to do this myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:16, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

In researching the differences between the two esters of fluticasone I found this article independantly and made an attempt at improving the page. My take on the "provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject" part of the multiple issues tag was that while this was about fluticasone everything in the article was about the esters; and that, for those unfamiliar, the insufficient context was the confusion between them.

The article was a letter in a refereed journal and I found it on the U.S. NIH website While the original letter does contain some advert type material, I do not think my edit contained or relayed any of that advert material to the article; and it is the only clear discription of the differences I could find on the internet.

Is my edit really less clear and, while not the best, does it not improve the context for those unfamiliar with the subject? Rather than just undoing the change I have to wonder if some changes to what I wrote, possible adding more citations to the differences, might be better that just leaving the article as the original.

Possibly the last sentence about abbreviating the esters to fluticasone being discouraged to help end confusion is a POV and should come out or be reworded.

Suggestions anyone? I'd like to clear up the page; but what more exactly do others think is unclear?

As an alternate, maybe the article could be deleted and a disambiguation page made to point to the split pages setup by user LSD in Jan. 2009. But I think that would only leave the confusion that those who are unfamiliar with the topic have between the different esters. So if that is done I would suggest each of the split pages have a little something on them about the differences and name confusion.Bob.A51 (talk) 03:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


Fluticasone does not appear to exist by itself and when people say Fluticasone they mean either the propionate or the furoate. This seems most appropriate as a disambig. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:37, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

User:BD2412 people use the term sloppily often when they mean the propionate as it is the more common / approved in the USA.
We could also just link this page to the propionate and than have a link to the less often used furoate. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:43, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
I guess we could also move this to a page called "Fluticasone preparations" [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:48, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Where usage is sloppy, it is often the best practice to have an article explaining this sloppiness of usage. A disambiguation page is not useful unless it helps clarify for readers which sense is likely meant when they come across the term. bd2412 T 14:32, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
I have restored the previous version of the page pending an outcome of this discussion. I note, for example, that the first line of Fluticasone furoate says that "Fluticasone furoate is a synthetic corticosteroid derived from fluticasone"; a disambiguation page at this point creates a circular reference, where Fluticasone furoate is defined as something derived from Fluticasone, which is defined as a set of terms including Fluticasone furoate. What are the shared qualities of all things asserted to be derived from Fluticasone? bd2412 T 16:33, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Looked at the ref in question and not seeing it support that content User:BD2412. Do you see were it does?
This ref says "fluticasone propionate -> fluticasone" and that at "fluticasone" it says "fluticasone propionate"
Basically "fluticasone propionate" is the one avaliable in the USA and the one made first many American sources do not recognize that the other one exists.
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:20, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
This is the link to the propionate Monograph A bunch of the other links in the drugbox are either broken or for the propionate. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:35, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
The issue here is that if there are a lot of link to a disambiguation page at this title, the average reader will have no way to figure out which disambiguation term is correct. It might not even be possible to tell from a source used to support adding the link in an article. A short explanatory article at this title would provide the context to understand the relationships between uses of the term. bd2412 T 15:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
The problem is that it is nearly impossible to find sources for such an article. But will see what I can do to not make this wrong. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:02, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
I appreciate the effort. bd2412 T 05:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)