ArticleLung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society
A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation.
Article in Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society. 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single inhaler with beclometasone, formoterol, and glycopyrronium versus triple therapies in adults with uncontrolled asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- A randomized, double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of a combination of formoterol and ciclesonide with ciclesonide alone in asthma subjects with moderate-to-severe airflow limitation.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest SocietyArticle
- Author's reply.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest SocietyArticle
- Role of impulse oscillometry in diagnosis and follow-up in bronchial asthma.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest SocietyArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThe combination of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) and long-acting beta-agonists (LABA) is widely used in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma uncontrolled by ICS alone.
aimsTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of a new ICS-LABA combination inhaler containing Formoterol (F) and Ciclesonide (C). SETTINGS AND
designA double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group fashion, multi-centric study. SUBJECTS AND
methodsA total of 169 asthma patients received Ciclesonide 80 μg once daily during a 4-week run-in period, after which, they were randomized to receive either C (80 μg) or a combination of F (4.5 μg) and C (80 μg) (FC) both delivered through a hydro-fluro-alkane pressurized-metered-dose inhaler as 1 puff twice daily, for 6 weeks. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: Inter-group differences were compared using t-test for independent samples at a significance level of 5%.
resultsFrom baseline, the improvements in forced expiratory volume in 1 s at 1, 3, and 6 weeks was significantly higher in the FC group compared to Group C (110 ml vs. 40 ml, 140 ml vs. 20 ml, and 110 ml vs. 40 ml, respectively, all P < 0.05). From baseline, the improvements in mean morning peak expiratory flow at 1, 3, and 6 weeks was significantly higher in the FC group compared to Group C (17 L/min vs.-3 L/min, 22 L/min vs. 3 L/min, and 30 ml vs. 8 L/min respectively, all P < 0.05). The changes in symptom scores were similar in both the groups. The adverse events in the FC group were not significantly different from those in the C group.
conclusionsFC provides better improvement than C alone in terms of lung function and symptoms without increased risk of adverse events in asthma patients.
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.