Trial reportInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2016
Bronchodilator efficacy of 18 μg once-daily tiotropium inhalation via Discair
Trial report in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02541006 (A Randomized, Parallel-group, Phase IV Study to Compare the Bronchodilator Efficacy of Tiotropium), which is not on this 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.
A Randomized, Parallel-group, Phase IV Study to Compare the Bronchodilator Efficacy of Tiotropium (18 µg Once Daily [od]) Delivered Via a DISCAIR With Tiotropium (18 µg od) Delivered Via a HandiHaler®, in Patients With Moderate-to-severe COPD
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bronchodilator Efficacy of a Single-Dose 12/400-µg Formoterol/Budesonide Combination as a Dry Powder for Inhalation Delivered by DiscairClinical drug investigation · 2019Trial
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
purposeTo compare the bronchodilator efficacy of 18 μg once-daily tiotropium inhalation administered via Discair PATIENTS AND
methodsFifty-eight patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were enrolled in this randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group, open-label, Phase IV non-inferiority trial. Patients were randomly assigned to a test group (n=29, inhalation with Discair) or a reference group (n=29, inhalation with HandiHaler). The primary efficacy parameter was the average maximum change in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV
resultsThe test inhaler was non-inferior to the reference inhaler in terms of maximum change in FEV
conclusionOur findings show that the Discair was non-inferior to the HandiHaler. More specifically, these devices had similar clinical efficacy in terms of time-dependent response over 24 h for patients with moderate-to-severe 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.