Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16856028›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Nedocromil sodium for chronic asthma in children.

A V Sridhar, M McKean

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Inhaled sodium cromoglycate for asthma in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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.

A V SridharLeicester Royal Infirmary, Department of Child Health, Clinical Sciences Building, Leicester, Leicestershire, UK LE1 5WW. sa135@le.ac.uk
M McKean
Leicester Royal Infirmary · GBRoyal Victoria Infirmary · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrently inhaled corticosteroids are the main stay in the maintenance treatment of chronic asthma in children. Although inhaled corticosteroids play a crucial role in the management of childhood asthma, the long-term side effects of inhaled corticosteroids used in the management of chronic asthma in children are not clearly known.

objectivesThe objective of this review is to compare the safety and efficacy of inhaled nedocromil sodium with placebo in the treatment of chronic asthma in children. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane airway group trials register, Cochrane controlled trials register, Current contents, review articles, reference lists of articles. We also contacted the drug manufacturer and primary authors for additional citations. We also searched abstracts of major respiratory society meetings. The last search was carried out in October 2004 SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised placebo controlled trials comparing nedocromil sodium to placebo in the treatment of chronic asthma in children (0 to 18 years). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. MAIN

resultsFifteen trials (twelve parallel group studies; three crossover trials recruiting 1422 children (837 males and 585 females)) were included. The studies were generally of good methodological quality. Two large long term studies used nedocromil for six months and four to six years and showed conflicting results in symptom free days. Short term studies (duration between 4 weeks to 12 weeks) showed that nedocromil sodium produced some improvement in a number of efficacy measures compared to placebo including FEV(1), FVC, FEV(1) % predicted, PC20 FEV(1), evening PEF and symptom scores. The parent's assessment of efficacy was in favour of nedocromil (odds ratio (OR) 0.5 (95% CI 0.3 to 0.8). Nedocromil sodium has a good safety profile. The only significant side effect observed was unpleasant taste. There was little evidence for a clinically dose response effect and only a few studies recruited participants with severe asthma. AUTHORS'

conclusionsA limited number of small studies have shown that nedocromil is of benefit in improving lung function and some measures of symptoms, but the evidence with regard to the primary outcome of the review was conflicting. Two long-term trials did not show consistent effects on lung function outcomes, whereas several small short-term trials have shown benefit in these outcomes. Differing severities at baseline may explain this difference with milder participants experiencing less benefit, although the discrepancy between study findings may also reflect publication bias. Nedocromil sodium is associated with a very good safety profile with no significant short term or long- term adverse side effects. Although nedocromil may have advantages over inhaled corticosteroids in terms of side effects, there is a need for head to head trials of nedocromil and inhaled corticosteroids to establish whether asthma control is similar, especially in mild asthma. It is not yet clear where nedocromil should sit in relation to other therapies in the treatment of asthma in children.

Indexed as

AdolescentAnti-Asthmatic AgentsAsthmaChildHumansNedocromilRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Asthmatic AgentsNedocromil

Identifiers

PMID16856028
PMCPMC8764903
OpenAlexW2108496813

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.