Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27084728›Full record

Trial reportAdvances in therapy2016

Tiotropium Respimat(®) Versus HandiHaler(®): Comparison of Bronchodilator Efficacy of Various Doses in Clinical Trials.

Peter M A Calverley, Michael Könen-Bergmann, Frank Richard, Susan Bell, Jens M Hohlfeld

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Advances in therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Peter M A CalverleyPulmonary and Rehabilitation Medicine, Institute of Ageing and Chronic Disease, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. pmacal@liverpool.ac.uk.
Michael Könen-BergmannClinical Development + Medical Affairs, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany.
Frank RichardMedicine TA Respiratory Diseases, Boehringer Ingelheim, Ingelheim, Germany.
Susan BellStatistics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bracknell, UK.
Jens M HohlfeldClinical Airway Research, Fraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine (ITEM), Hannover, Germany.
Boehringer Ingelheim (Germany) · DEBoehringer Ingelheim (United Kingdom) · GBFraunhofer Institute for Toxicology and Experimental Medicine · DEUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe long-acting muscarinic antagonist tiotropium bromide is approved in many countries as maintenance therapy for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Tiotropium is available as a dry-powder formulation delivered via HandiHaler(®) (18 μg once daily) and is now also approved as an aqueous solution delivered via the Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler (5 μg once daily, 2 puffs of 2.5 µg). Several studies have compared the efficacy of tiotropium HandiHaler (18 μg once daily) with different doses of Respimat. We aimed to compare available bronchodilator efficacy data of once-daily Respimat 1.25, 2.5, 5, 10, 20 µg, and HandiHaler 18 µg to investigate which dose of tiotropium delivered by Respimat is the closest match to tiotropium HandiHaler.

methodsEvaluation of six clinical trials (duration from 3 weeks to 2-3 years) that included lung function measures (trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s and trough forced vital capacity) as key outcomes.

resultsIn the six trials, bronchodilator efficacy of Respimat 5 μg and HandiHaler 18 μg was similar; however, reduced bronchodilator efficacy was observed with lower doses of Respimat (1.25 and 2.5 μg).

conclusionThese findings support the use of the marketed once-daily dose of Respimat 5 μg for the maintenance treatment of patients with COPD.

fundingBoehringer Ingelheim.

Indexed as

Tiotropium BromideAdministration, InhalationAgedBronchodilator AgentsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug MonitoringFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscarinic AntagonistsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveTreatment OutcomeBronchodilator AgentsMuscarinic AntagonistsTiotropium BromideBronchodilatorChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)Dose–responseEfficacyLong-acting muscarinic antagonistLung functionOnce-dailyPulmonologyRespimat®SpirometryTiotropium

Identifiers

PMID27084728
PMCPMC4882367
OpenAlexW2335198057

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.