ArticlePloS one2014
Primary care COPD patients compared with large pharmaceutically-sponsored COPD studies: an UNLOCK validation study.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 53 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
53 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Pharmacologic Maintenance Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Methodological Considerations and Recommendations.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Pooled it
- Case-Finding and Treatment Effects in COPD: Secondary Analysis of an Interdisciplinary Intervention Trial.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2024Trial
- Follow-up interviews from The Salford Lung Study (COPD) and analyses per treatment and exacerbations.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2019Trial
- Treatment response to indacaterol/glycopyrronium versus salmeterol/fluticasone in exacerbating COPD patients by gender: a post-hoc analysis in the FLAME study.Respiratory research · 2019Trial
- Efficacy of Umeclidinium/Vilanterol in Elderly Patients with COPD: A Pooled Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Drugs & aging · 2018Trial
- Salford Lung Study in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (SLS COPD): follow-up interviews on patient-centred outcomes.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2017Trial
- Efficacy and safety of direct switch to indacaterol/glycopyrronium in patients with moderate COPD: the CRYSTAL open-label randomised trial.Respiratory research · 2017Trial
- Safety and efficacy of tiotropium Respimat versus HandiHaler in patients naive to treatment with inhaled anticholinergics: a post hoc analysis of the TIOSPIR trial.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2015Trial
- Blood Eosinophils in Chinese COPD Participants and Response to Treatment with Combination Low-Dose Theophylline and Prednisone: A Post-Hoc Analysis of the TASCS Trial.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseTrial
- Review
- De-implementation of inappropriate inhaled corticosteroid use in patients with COPD in general practice, results of a mixed methods study.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2025Article
- Phase 2a, Randomized Trial of Mitiperstat Versus Placebo in Patients with COPD at High Risk of Exacerbation (CRESCENDO).International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025Article
- Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Antihypertensive Medication Prescribing Patterns and Effectiveness.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2024Article
- Article
- Rational use of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of COPD.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2023Review
- Treatment Patterns, Socioeconomic Status and Clinical Burden in Mild COPD: A Swedish Real-World, Retrospective Cohort Study, the ARCTIC Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Article
- Blood eosinophils to guide inhaled maintenance therapy in a primary care COPD population.ERJ open research · 2022Article
- Article
- Impact of gender on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease outcomes: a propensity score-matched analysis of a prospective cohort study.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2020Article
- Real-World Data and Randomised Controlled Trials: The Salford Lung Study.Advances in therapy · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGuideline recommendations for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are based on the results of large pharmaceutically-sponsored COPD studies (LPCS). There is a paucity of data on disease characteristics at the primary care level, while the majority of COPD patients are treated in primary care.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the external validity of six LPCS (ISOLDE, TRISTAN, TORCH, UPLIFT, ECLIPSE, POET-COPD) on which current guidelines are based, in relation to primary care COPD patients, in order to inform future clinical practice guidelines and trials.
methodsBaseline data of seven primary care databases (n=3508) from Europe were compared to baseline data of the LPCS. In addition, we examined the proportion of primary care patients eligible to participate in the LPCS, based on inclusion criteria.
resultsOverall, patients included in the LPCS were younger (mean difference (MD)-2.4; p=0.03), predominantly male (MD 12.4; p=0.1) with worse lung function (FEV1% MD -16.4; p<0.01) and worse quality of life scores (SGRQ MD 15.8; p=0.01). There were large differences in GOLD stage distribution compared to primary care patients. Mean exacerbation rates were higher in LPCS, with an overrepresentation of patients with ≥ 1 and ≥ 2 exacerbations, although results were not statistically significant. Our findings add to the literature, as we revealed hitherto unknown GOLD I exacerbation characteristics, showing 34% of mild patients had ≥ 1 exacerbations per year and 12% had ≥ 2 exacerbations per year. The proportion of primary care patients eligible for inclusion in LPCS ranged from 17% (TRISTAN) to 42% (ECLIPSE, UPLIFT).
conclusionPrimary care COPD patients stand out from patients enrolled in LPCS in terms of gender, lung function, quality of life and exacerbations. More research is needed to determine the effect of pharmacological treatment in mild to moderate patients. We encourage future guideline makers to involve primary care populations in their recommendations.
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.