ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2016
Investigation of the efficacy of generic and brand-name tiotropium bromide in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A randomized comparative trial.
Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2016. 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of TQC3403 in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 equivalence trial.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe beneficial effects of tiotropium bromide, a long acting anticholinergic bronchodilator, in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have been shown in previous studies. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of generic (Tiova®) and brand-name (Spiriva®) tiotropium preparations in patients with COPD. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In this randomized double-blind parallel-group trial, 79 patients with documented COPD were assigned to Tiova® or Spiriva® for a period of 4 weeks. Assessment of pulmonary function (using spirometry), quality-of-life (using St. George respiratory Questionnaire [SGRQ]) and severity of respiratory symptoms (using breathlessness, cough and sputum scale [BCSS]) was performed at baseline and at the end of treatment period.
resultsThere were significant increases in FEV1 and reductions in FVC by the end of study in both Tiova® and Spiriva® groups. FEV1/FVC ratio did not change significantly neither in the Tiova® nor in Spiriva® group. Overall SGRQ score as well as subscale scores of symptoms, activity and impacts were improved by both drugs. In the BCSS scale, the frequency and severity of three main symptoms (dyspnea, cough and sputum) was decreased by both drugs. Baseline as well as post-treatment values of spirometric parameters, SGRQ and BCSS scores was comparable between the groups, apart from a lower post-treatment frequency of cough and sputum in the Spiriva® versus Tiova® group. There was no report of adverse events in either of the study groups.
conclusionThe findings of this comparative trial showed equivalent efficacy and safety of Spiriva® and Tiova® in lessening the symptoms as well as improving the quality of life in patients with COPD. This finding has an important translational value given the significantly lower costs of generic versus brand-name products.
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.