ReviewTherapeutics and clinical risk management2016
Use of ICS/LABA (extra-fine and non-extra-fine) in elderly asthmatics.
Review in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of extrafine and non-extrafine inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists as maintenance and reliever therapy in asthma: a randomized open-label crossover trial.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2025Trial
- Comparison of Two pMDIs in Adult Asthmatics: A Randomized Double-Blind Double-Dummy Clinical Trial.Tuberculosis and respiratory diseases · 2022Article
- Packaging and Delivery of Asthma Therapeutics.Pharmaceutics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Age represents an exclusion criterion in randomized clinical trials designed to test the efficacy and safety of inhaled drugs in asthma. As a consequence, data on efficacy and safety of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) and long-acting β2 agonist (LABA) combinations in elderly asthmatics are scanty. Older age is associated with an increased proportion of comorbid conditions; in addition, all organ functions undergo a process of senescence, thus reducing their ability to metabolize the agents. Overall, these age-associated conditions may variably, and often unpredictably, affect the metabolism and excretion of respiratory drugs. However, pharmacological treatment of asthma does not follow specific recommendations in the elderly. In the elderly, the ICS/LABA combinations may carry an increased risk of local indesiderable effects, primarily due to the lack of coordination between activation of the device and inhalation, and systemic adverse events, mainly due to the greater amount of active drug that is available because of the age-associated changes in organ functions as well as drug-to-drug and drug-to-concomitant disease interactions. The extra-fine formulations of ICSs/LABAs, which allow for a more favorable drug deposition in the lungs at a reduced dose, may contribute to overcome this issue. This review revises the efficacy and safety of treatment with ICSs/LABAs, focusing on the main pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of the drugs and highlighting the potential risks in the elderly asthmatic population.
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.