Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28694697›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2017

Double bronchodilation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a crude analysis from a systematic review.

Jose Luis Lopez-Campos, Carmen Calero-Acuña, Eduardo Márquez-Martín, Esther Quintana Gallego, Laura Carrasco-Hernández, Maria Abad Arranz, Francisco Ortega Ruiz

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Step-Up and Step-Down Treatment Approaches for COPD: A Holistic View of Progressive Therapies.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2021
    Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jose Luis Lopez-CamposVirgen del Rocio University Hospital, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Carmen Calero-AcuñaVirgen del Rocio University Hospital, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Eduardo Márquez-MartínVirgen del Rocio University Hospital, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Esther Quintana GallegoVirgen del Rocio University Hospital, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Laura Carrasco-HernándezVirgen del Rocio University Hospital, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Maria Abad ArranzVirgen del Rocio University Hospital, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Francisco Ortega RuizVirgen del Rocio University Hospital, Biomedicine Institute of Seville (IBiS), Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío · ESInstituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla · ESInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe combination of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and a long-acting β

methodsA systematic review of clinical trials investigating LABA/LAMA combination therapies was conducted. Articles were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Scopus on June 26, 2016. We specifically selected clinical trials with a randomized controlled or crossover design published in any scientific journal showing the following characteristics: 1) comparison of different LABA/LAMA combinations in a single inhaler for patients with COPD, 2) dose approved in Europe, and 3) focus on efficacy (versus placebo and/or bronchodilator monotherapy) in terms of lung function, respiratory symptoms, or exacerbations.

resultsWe analyzed 26 clinical trials conducted on 24,338 patients. All LABA/LAMA combinations were consistently able to improve lung function compared with both placebo and bronchodilator monotherapy. Improvements in symptoms were also consistent versus placebo, showing some lack of correlation for some clinical end points and combinations versus monotherapy bronchodilation. Albeit being an exploratory end point, exacerbations showed an improvement with LABA/LAMA combinations over placebo in some trials; however, scarce information was available in comparison with bronchodilator monotherapy in most studies.

conclusionOur data show consistent improvements for LABA/LAMA combinations, albeit with some variability (depending on the clinical end point, the specific combination, and the comparison group). Clinicians should be aware that these are average differences. All treatments should be tailored at the individual level to optimize clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Administration, InhalationAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsBronchodilator AgentsClinical Trials as TopicDisease ProgressionDrug CombinationsForced Expiratory VolumeHumansLungMuscarinic AntagonistsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveTreatment OutcomeAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsBronchodilator AgentsDrug CombinationsMuscarinic AntagonistsbronchodilatorsCOPDefficacysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28694697
PMCPMC5491571
OpenAlexW2637395099

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.