ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2020
Inhaled Corticosteroid Treatment Regimens and Health Outcomes in a UK COPD Population Study.
Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment Transitions in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Retrospective Analyses of US and UK Healthcare Databases.Pulmonary therapy · 2022Article
- Pulmonologists' Opinion on the Use of Inhaled Corticosteroids in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Patients in Spain: A Cross-Sectional Survey.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Article
- Individual trajectory-based care for COPD: getting closer, but not there yet.ERJ open research · 2021Review
- Withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids versus continuation of triple therapy in patients with COPD in real life: observational comparative effectiveness study.Respiratory research · 2021Observational
- Real-World Treatment Patterns of Multiple-Inhaler Triple Therapy Among Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in UK General Practice.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseObservational
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are a prevailing treatment option for COPD patients but recent guidelines have relegated their use predominantly to patients with frequent exacerbations. Yet large numbers of patients worldwide are currently treated with ICS-containing regimens. We wished to determine in routine clinical practice how common ICS withdrawal is and the differences in health outcomes between patients managed on ICS-containing and non-ICS containing regimens. Patients and Methods: COPD patients were identified from the UK primary care electronic healthcare records, between 2014 and 2018. Patients were grouped into three treatment regimens: long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), LABA and long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA), and triple therapy (LABA, LAMA and ICS). Annual incidence of ICS withdrawal was measured. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify patient factors associated with withdrawal. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to assess the association of exacerbations and hospitalised pneumonia between the ICS-containing regimens (LABA-ICS and triple therapy) and patients prescribed LABA-LAMA. Results: Of 117,046 patients, around three-quarters were prescribed ICS-containing inhalers but ICS withdrawal occurred annually in only approximately 2-3% of patients. Exacerbations in the past year, but not a past history of pneumonia, were associated with ICS withdrawal. A total of 31,034 patients using three treatment regimens (LABA-ICS, LABA-LAMA or triple therapy) were assessed for their relative risk of exacerbations and pneumonia; the exacerbation risk was slightly lower in LABA-ICS users but the same in triple therapy users, as compared to LABA-LAMA users (LABA-ICS adjusted IRR=0.82 (95% CI 0.73-0.93), triple adjusted IRR=0.99 (95% CI 0.88-1.11)). There was no difference in the pneumonia risk (LABA-ICS adjusted IRR=0.96 (95% CI 0.71-1.31), triple adjusted IRR=1.16 (95% CI 0.87-1.57)). Conclusion: Use of ICS-containing inhaled medication is prevalent across the UK while ICS withdrawal from established treatment was relatively uncommon. Exacerbations and pneumonia risk was similar between the ICS-containing and non-ICS containing treatment regimens.
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.