SynthesisJournal of Korean medical science2015
Effect of Indacaterol on Cough and Phlegm in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Five Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Journal of Korean medical science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Real-World Evidence Study for Distribution of Traditional Chinese Medicine Syndrome and Its Elements on Respiratory Disease.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the effects of indacaterol on cough and phlegm in patients with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We performed a meta-analysis with five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of indacaterol in stable COPD patients. The symptom severity was defined using the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). We analyzed patients treated with 150 µg (n = 945) and 300 µg (n = 832) out of 3,325 patients who completed the SGRQ from five RCTs. After a 12-week treatment of 150 µg indacaterol, cough improvement was reported in 36.5% (316/866) of patients treated with indacaterol vs. 32.2% (259/804) patients treated with placebo (Relative Ratio [RR], 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99-1.29). Phlegm improvement was reported in 31.0% (247/798) of patients treated with indacaterol vs. 30.6% (225/736) of patients treated with placebo (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.87-1.18). Dyspnea improvement was reported in 39.5% (324/820) of patients treated with indacaterol vs. 31.5% (237/753) patients treated with placebo (RR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.03-1.71; P = 0.001, I(2) = 55.1%). Only dyspnea improvement was significant compared to placebo even at the 300 µg indacaterol dose. Compared to placebo, a 12-week treatment of the long-acting beta-agonist, indacaterol might not have a significant effect on cough or phlegm in stable COPD.
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.