ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2018
Comparison of clinical efficacy between ultra-LABAs and ultra-LAMAs in COPD: a systemic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in COPD severe exacerbations, and all-cause and respiratory mortality, before and after implementation of newer long-acting bronchodilators in a large population-based cohort.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2024Article
- A Prediction Scoring Model for the Effect of Withdrawal or Addition of Inhaled Corticosteroids in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA single long-acting bronchodilator, ultra-long acting muscarinic antagonist (ultra-LAMA) or ultra-long acting β
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched (to March 1, 2017) to identify all published randomized controlled trials.
resultsOf the 12,906 articles found by searching the databases, we obtained data from 10,591 patients with COPD (LABA, n=5,058; LAMA, n=5,533) in seven published studies. Our results showed that COPD exacerbation were significantly lower in patients taking ultra-LAMA than those taking ultra-LABA (odds ratio =0.857, P=0.0008). However, no significant differences were observed between ultra-LAMA and ultra-LABA patients regarding improvement in trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s, the transitional dyspnea index, or St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire score.
conclusionsThis study suggests that COPD exacerbation occurred less often in patients taking an ultra-LAMA than in those taking an ultra-LABA with similar efficacy of lung function and quality of life.
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.