ArticleCOPD2018
Spirometric Criteria for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Clinical Trials of Pharmacotherapy.
Article in COPD, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Trial
- Re-evaluation of combination therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).Respiratory medicine · 2019Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical trials of pharmacotherapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often include older persons with moderate-to-severe airflow-obstruction, as defined by the Global Initiative for chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD). In this context, spirometric airflow-obstruction establishes COPD. Because GOLD misidentifies COPD and its severity in older persons, we set out to apply more age-appropriate spirometric criteria from the Global Lung function Initiative (GLI) in a prior clinical trial of COPD pharmacotherapy, specifically the Towards a Revolution in COPD Health (TORCH) trial - N = 6,112, mean age 65 years. In the TORCH trial, which enrolled GOLD-defined moderate COPD (26.2%, n = 1,200) and GOLD-defined severe COPD (73.8%, n = 4,511), the GLI reclassification yielded a higher frequency of severe COPD (89.6%, n = 5,474), the inclusion of restrictive-pattern (6.9%, n = 420) and, in turn, a very low frequency of moderate COPD (3.5%, n = 212). These GLI reclassification results suggest that GOLD-based enrollment criteria for the TORCH trial may have assembled a cohort that was: 1) less likely to respond to COPD pharmacotherapy, given the greater representation of severe COPD, very minor representation of moderate COPD, and inclusion of a non-obstructive spirometric impairment (restrictive-pattern); and 2) more likely to have medication-related adverse events, given the inappropriate use of COPD pharmacotherapy in misidentified COPD (restrictive-pattern). We therefore propose that future clinical trials of COPD pharmacotherapy should consider GLI criteria for defining COPD, including a greater representation of GLI-defined moderate 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.