Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16034882›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005

Macrolides for chronic asthma.

L Richeldi, G Ferrara, L M Fabbri, T J Lasserson, P G Gibson

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Macrolides versus placebo for chronic asthma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. A trial of clarithromycin for the treatment of suboptimally controlled asthma.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2010
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Asthma and the host-microbe interaction.The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology · 2013
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Effects of atypical infections with Mycoplasma and Chlamydia on asthma.Immunology and allergy clinics of North America · 2010
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Pharmacotherapy of severe asthma.Current opinion in pharmacology · 2010
    Review
  14. Role of macrolide therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2008
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

L RicheldiDivisione di Pneumologia, Policlinico di Modena, Via del Pozzo, 71, Modena, Italy, 41100. richeldi.luca@unimo.it
G Ferrara
L M Fabbri
T J Lasserson
P G Gibson
Policlinico di Modena · ITSt George's, University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAsthma is a chronic disease of the airways in which inflammation of the respiratory mucosa plays a crucial role. The mechanisms responsible for the maintaining of this inflammatory response are only partially known and there is evidence that a role could be paid by chronic infection by intracellular pathogens (such as Chlamydia pneumoniae). Macrolides are antibiotics with both antimicrobic and antiinflammatory activities and thus their use in asthmatic patients could lead to reduction of the airways inflammation and therefore improvement of symptoms and pulmonary function.

objectivesTo determine whether macrolides are effective in the management of patients with chronic asthma. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials up to May 2004. This was also supplemented by manually searching bibliographies of previously published reviews, conference proceedings, and contacting study authors. All languages were included in the initial search. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, controlled clinical trials involving both children and adult patients with chronic asthma treated with macrolides for more than 4 weeks, versus placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently examined all identified articles. The full text of any potentially relevant article was reviewed independently by two reviewers. MAIN

resultsSeven studies recruiting a total of 416 participants met the inclusion criteria. The quality of reporting of study methodology was generally low. We assembled findings from studies comparing macrolide treatment for at least 4 weeks in adult and pediatric patients treated for chronic asthma. Four studies showed a positive effect on symptoms of macrolides in different types of asthmatic patients. There were limited data available for meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in FEV1 for either parallel or crossover trials. However, there were significant differences in eosinophilic inflammation and symptoms. One large parallel group trial reported significant differences in peak flow but these differences abated within six months of treatment. AUTHORS'

conclusionsConsidering the small number of patients studied, there is insufficient evidence to support or to refute the use of macrolides in patients with chronic asthma. Further studies are needed in particular to clarify the potential role of macrolides in some subgroups of asthmatics such as those with evidence of chronic bacterial infection.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAsthmaChronic DiseaseHumansMacrolidesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial AgentsMacrolides

Identifiers

PMID16034882
OpenAlexW4254959349

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.