Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12396225›Full record

ReviewDrugs2002

Second-line controller therapy for persistent asthma uncontrolled on inhaled corticosteroids: the step 3 dilemma.

Brian J Lipworth, Catherine M Jackson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Brian J LipworthDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Asthma and Allergy Research Group, Ninewells University Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK. topdoc@brianlipworth.com
Catherine M Jackson
Ninewells Hospital · GBUniversity of Dundee · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The asthma syndrome is characterised by airway inflammation with associated bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) and reversible airflow obstruction. Therapy has benefited from an enhanced understanding of the pathophysiology of asthma and the resulting guidelines that emphasise the pivotal role of anti-inflammatory inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) as first-line therapy. Most patients with mild-to-moderate asthma can be adequately controlled on low-to-medium dosages of ICS alone. For patients with moderate-to-severe asthma who are not adequately controlled by ICS, it is unclear which medication should be added on. The two principal drugs under consideration are long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) and leukotriene antagonists (LTAs). Although both LABAs and LTAs are both effective at improving lung function, reducing symptoms and decreasing exacerbations, important differences exist that may determine the selection of one over the other in particular circumstances. LABAs and LTAs are equally effective at reducing exacerbations and improving symptoms and quality of life when used as add-on therapy. LABAs tend to be more effective bronchodilators than LTAs. Although LABAs stabilise the airway smooth muscle, they do not affect the underlying inflammatory process. Their long-term use also leads to subsensitivity of response to both LABAs and short-acting beta(2)-agonists (SABAs). The subsensitivity of response to SABAs is more pronounced in the presence of acute bronchoconstriction, which could be relevant during an acute attack. When combined with an ICS, LTAs provide additive non-steroidal anti-inflammatory properties and alleviate associated BHR, but do not induce subsensitivity of response. Not only is the efficacy of LTAs maintained over time, but also they do not affect the response to SABAs as reliever therapy. LTAs also have beneficial effects in patients who have concomitant allergic rhinitis, thus treating the unified airway. The choice between LABA and LTA as add-on therapy will therefore be determined by the needs of the individual patient in terms of providing anti-inflammatory versus bronchodilatory control. For patients with poor lung function where bronchodilatation is required, then an LABA would seem to be a logical choice. For the patient whose lung function is less impaired, with evidence of ongoing BHR where bronchoprotection is needed (e.g. exercise, allergen, cold air), or when there is concomitant allergic rhinitis, then an LTA would be more suitable.

Indexed as

Administration, InhalationAdrenal Cortex HormonesAnti-Asthmatic AgentsAsthmaDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansLeukotriene AntagonistsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSeverity of Illness IndexAdrenal Cortex HormonesAnti-Asthmatic AgentsLeukotriene Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID12396225
OpenAlexW71227319

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.