Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28614995›Full record

Trial reportTherapeutic advances in respiratory disease2017

Ease of use of tobramycin inhalation powder compared with nebulized tobramycin and colistimethate sodium: a crossover study in cystic fibrosis patients with pulmonary Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection.

James Greenwood, Carsten Schwarz, Urte Sommerwerck, Edward F Nash, Michael Tamm, Weihua Cao, Paul Mastoridis, Laurie Debonnett, Kamal Hamed

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IVComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Therapeutic advances in respiratory disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Therapeutic Interventions forJournal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

James GreenwoodLiverpool Heart and Chest Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Thomas Drive, Liverpool, UK.
Carsten SchwarzDepartment of Pediatric Pneumology and Immunology, Cystic Fibrosis Centre Berlin, Charité-University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Urte SommerwerckDepartment of Pneumology, Ruhrlandklinik, West German Lung Center, University Hospital of Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Edward F NashWest Midlands Adult Cystic Fibrosis Centre, Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
Michael TammClinic of Pneumology and Respiratory Cell Research, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland.
Weihua CaoNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Paul MastoridisNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Laurie DebonnettNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA.
Kamal HamedNovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ 07936-1080, USA.
Novartis (United States) · USCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEHeart of England NHS Foundation Trust · GBLiverpool Heart and Chest Hospital · GBRuhrlandklinik · DEUniversity Hospital of Basel · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study assessed the ease of use of tobramycin inhalation powder (TIP) administered via T-326 inhaler versus tobramycin inhalation solution (TIS) and colistimethate sodium (COLI), both administered via nebulizers, for the treatment of chronic pulmonary Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF).

methodsA real-world, open-label, crossover, interventional phase IV study was conducted in CF patients aged ⩾6 years with forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV

resultsA total of 60 patients [mean (standard deviation) age, 27.6 (8.4) years] were allocated to three treatment arms [TIS/TIP ( n = 14); COLI/TIP ( n = 28); TIP/TIP ( n = 18)] in Cycle 1. The mean total administration time, which included device setup and cleaning, in Cycle 1 versus Cycle 2 for TIS/TIP, COLI/TIP, and TIP/TIP arms were 37.0 versus 5.0 min, 16.4 versus 3.8 min, and 4.2 versus 3.4 min, respectively. The difference in mean total administration time was significantly shorter in Cycle 2 than in Cycle 1 for TIS/TIP ( p = 0.0112) and COLI/TIP ( p = 0.0016) arms. Overall, 12 patients were found to have contaminated devices across the two treatment cycles. In the TIP/TIP arm, no contamination of the T-326 inhaler was observed in either cycle. Treatment satisfaction, assessed by the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication and ACCEPT® questionnaire, was better overall for TIP compared with TIS and COLI. There were no unexpected adverse events and most were mild or moderate in intensity.

conclusionThe T-326 inhaler used to deliver TIP was easy to use, required shorter total administration time, and was much less frequently contaminated than the nebulizers. The safety findings observed for TIP were generally consistent with its established safety profile.

Indexed as

Administration, InhalationAdolescentAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsChildColistinCross-Over StudiesCystic FibrosisEquipment ContaminationEquipment DesignEuropeFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansLungMaleAnti-Bacterial AgentsColistincolistinmethanesulfonic acidPowdersTobramycindevice contaminationease of usenebulizerPseudomonas aeruginosaT-326 inhalertobramycin

Identifiers

PMID28614995
PMCPMC5933634
OpenAlexW2624809766

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.