Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25973230›Full record

ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2015

Addition to inhaled corticosteroids of leukotriene receptor antagonists versus theophylline for symptomatic asthma: a meta-analysis.

Xin Chen, Ying-Bo Kang, Li-Qing Wang, Yun Li, Yu-Wen Luo, Zhe Zhu, Rui Chen

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xin Chen1 Department of Respiratory Diseases, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 2 Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou 515041, China ; 3 Department of Pharmacy, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 4 Department of Respiratory Diseases, SUN Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, SUN Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Ying-Bo Kang1 Department of Respiratory Diseases, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 2 Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou 515041, China ; 3 Department of Pharmacy, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 4 Department of Respiratory Diseases, SUN Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, SUN Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Li-Qing Wang1 Department of Respiratory Diseases, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 2 Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou 515041, China ; 3 Department of Pharmacy, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 4 Department of Respiratory Diseases, SUN Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, SUN Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Yun Li1 Department of Respiratory Diseases, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 2 Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou 515041, China ; 3 Department of Pharmacy, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 4 Department of Respiratory Diseases, SUN Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, SUN Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Yu-Wen Luo1 Department of Respiratory Diseases, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 2 Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou 515041, China ; 3 Department of Pharmacy, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 4 Department of Respiratory Diseases, SUN Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, SUN Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Zhe Zhu1 Department of Respiratory Diseases, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 2 Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou 515041, China ; 3 Department of Pharmacy, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 4 Department of Respiratory Diseases, SUN Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, SUN Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Rui Chen1 Department of Respiratory Diseases, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 2 Department of Pharmacy, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shantou University Medical College, Shantou 515041, China ; 3 Department of Pharmacy, Zhujiang Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China ; 4 Department of Respiratory Diseases, SUN Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, SUN Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510120, China.
Zhujiang Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are widely used in combination with second controller medications in the management of asthma in adults and children. There lacks a systematic comparison between addition of leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) and theophylline to ICS. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the difference of the efficacy and safety profile of adding either LTRAs or theophylline to ICS in adults and children with symptomatic asthma.

methodsRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) published prior to November 2014 were acquired through systematically searching and selected based on the established inclusion criteria for publications. The data extracted from the included studies were further analyzed by a meta-analysis.

resultsWe included eight RCTs, of which six recruited adults and two recruited children aged 5 to 14 years. The primary outcomes were changes in lung function from baseline, including forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow (PEF). Overall, addition of LTRAs led to significantly better morning PEF {mean difference (MD) 16.94 [95% confidence interval (CI): 11.49-22.39] L/min, P<0.01} and FEV1 [MD 0.09 (95% CI: 0.03-0.15) L, P=0.005] as compared to addition of theophylline. There were no differences between the two treatments in terms of evening PEF, adverse events, rescue medication use and asthma exacerbation.

conclusionsThe combination of LTRA and ICS leads to modestly greater improvement in lung function than the combination of theophylline and ICS in the treatment of symptomatic asthma. Long-term trials are required to assess the efficacy and safety of these two therapies.

Indexed as

Inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs)leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs)meta-analysistheophylline

Identifiers

PMID25973230
PMCPMC4419319
OpenAlexW2133026321

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.