SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009
Inhaled corticosteroids for cystic fibrosis.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inhaled corticosteroids for cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Budesonide efficacy and safety in patients with bronchiectasis not due to cystic fibrosis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2012Trial
- C-Reactive Protein in Stable Cystic Fibrosis: An Additional Indicator of Clinical Disease Activity and Risk of Future Pulmonary Exacerbations.Journal of pulmonary & respiratory medicine · 2016Article
- Observational
- Cystic fibrosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2015Review
- Targeting airway inflammation in cystic fibrosis in children: past, present, and future.Paediatric drugs · 2011Review
- Cystic fibrosis papers of the year 2009.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2010Article
- [Cystic fibrosis in adults].Der Internist · 2010Review
- Potential of anti-inflammatory treatment for cystic fibrosis lung disease.Journal of inflammation research · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReduction of lung inflammation is one of the goals of cystic fibrosis (CF) therapy. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are often used to treat children and adults with CF. The rationale for this is their potential to reduce lung damage arising from inflammation, as well as their effect on symptomatic wheezing. It is important to establish the current level of evidence for the risks and benefits of ICS, especially in the light of their known adverse effects on growth.
objectivesTo assess the effectiveness of taking regular ICS, compared to not taking them, in children and adults with CF. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register, comprising references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We requested information from pharmaceutical companies manufacturing inhaled corticosteroids and authors of identified trials.Date of most recent search of the Group's Trials Register: June 2008. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials, published and unpublished, comparing ICS to placebo or standard treatment in individuals with CF. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent authors assessed methodological quality of trials using established criteria and extracted data using standard pro formas. MAIN
resultsThirty citations were identified by the searches, of which 25, representing 13 trials were eligible for inclusion. These 13 trials reported the use of ICS in 506 people with CF aged between 6 and 55 years. One trial was a withdrawal study in individuals who were already taking ICS. Methodological quality was difficult to assess from published information. Inclusion criteria varied between trials, as did type and duration of treatment and timing of outcome assessments. Objective measures of airway function were reported in most trials but were often incomplete. Significant benefit has not been conclusively demonstrated. Four trials systematically documented adverse effects and growth was significantly affected in one study using high doses. AUTHORS'
conclusionsEvidence from these trials is insufficient to establish whether ICS are beneficial in CF, but withdrawal in those already taking them has been shown to be safe. There is some evidence they may cause harm in terms of growth. It has not been established whether long-term use is beneficial in reducing lung inflammation, which should improve survival, but it is unlikely this will be proven conclusively in a randomised controlled trial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.