Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26316734›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2015

Safety of inhaled glycopyrronium in patients with COPD: a comprehensive analysis of clinical studies and post-marketing data.

Anthony D D'Urzo, Edward M Kerwin, Kenneth R Chapman, Marc Decramer, Robert DiGiovanni, Peter D'Andrea, Huilin Hu, Pankaj Goyal, Pablo Altman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Anthony D D'UrzoDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Edward M KerwinClinical Research Institute of Southern Oregon, PC, Medford, USA.
Kenneth R ChapmanAsthma and Airway Centre, University Health Network, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Marc DecramerRespiratory Division, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Robert DiGiovanniNovartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Peter D'AndreaNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Huilin HuNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Pankaj GoyalNovartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.
Pablo AltmanNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Novartis (Switzerland) · CHNovartis (United States) · USClinical Research Institute · USKU Leuven · BETris Pharma (United States) · USUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic use of inhaled anticholinergics by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has raised long-term safety concerns, particularly cardiovascular. Glycopyrronium is a once-daily anticholinergic with greater receptor selectivity than previously available agents.

methodsWe assessed the safety of inhaled glycopyrronium using data pooled from two analysis sets, involving six clinical studies and over 4,000 patients with COPD who received one of the following treatments: glycopyrronium 50 μg, placebo (both delivered via the Breezhaler device), or tiotropium 18 μg (delivered via the HandiHaler device). Data were pooled from studies that varied in their duration and severity of COPD of the patients (ie, ≤12 weeks duration with patients having moderate or severe COPD; and >1 year duration with patients having severe and very severe COPD). Safety comparisons were made for glycopyrronium vs tiotropium or placebo. Poisson regression was used to assess the relative risk for either active drug or placebo (and between drugs where placebo was not available) for assessing the incidence of safety events. During post-marketing surveillance (PMS), safety was assessed by obtaining reports from various sources, and disproportionality scores were computed using EMPIRICA. In particular, the cardiac safety of glycopyrronium during the post-marketing phase was evaluated.

resultsThe overall incidence of adverse events and deaths was similar across groups, while the incidence of serious adverse events was numerically higher in placebo. Furthermore, glycopyrronium did not result in an increased risk of cerebro-cardiovascular events vs placebo. There were no new safety reports during the PMS phase that suggested an increased risk compared to results from the clinical studies. Moreover, the cardiac safety of glycopyrronium during the PMS phase was also consistent with the clinical data.

conclusionThe overall safety profile of glycopyrronium was similar to its comparators indicating no increase in the overall risk for any of the investigated safety end points.

Indexed as

Administration, InhalationAgedAged, 80 and overBronchodilator AgentsFemaleGlycopyrrolateHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedMuscarinic AntagonistsNebulizers and VaporizersPatient SafetyProduct Surveillance, PostmarketingPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicBronchodilator AgentsGlycopyrrolateMuscarinic AntagonistsCOPDdrug safetyglycopyrroniumpost-marketing surveillance

Identifiers

PMID26316734
PMCPMC4541545
OpenAlexW1720820661

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.