ArticleJournal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics2021
A disease progression model of longitudinal lung function decline in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis patients.
Article in Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and tolerability of generic pirfenidone after switch from EsbrietInternal and emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- The Potential of Disease Progression Modeling to Advance Clinical Development and Decision Making.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Review
- Protein kinases: drug targets for immunological disorders.Nature reviews. Immunology · 2023Review
- Prognostic Value of Serum Biomarkers in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis in Relation to Disease Progression.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Lung function trajectories in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.Respiratory research · 2023Observational
- Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis therapy development: a clinical pharmacology perspective.Therapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pirfenidone and nintedanib are the first two FDA-approved therapies for treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). The clinical programs for pirfenidone and nintedanib included 1132 patients in the placebo arms and 1691 patients in the treatment arms across 6 trials. We developed a disease progression model to characterize the observed variability in lung function decline, measured as percent predicted forced vital capacity (%p-FVC), and its decrease in decline after treatment. The non-linear longitudinal change in %p-FVC was best described by a Weibull function. The median decreased decline in %p-FVC after treatment was estimated to be 1.50% (95% CI [1.12, 1.79]) and 1.96% (95% CI [1.47, 2.36]) at week 26 and week 52, respectively. Smoking status, weight, %p-FVC, %p-DLco and oxygen use at baseline were identified as significant covariates affecting decline in %p-FVC. The decreased decline in %p-FVC were observed among all subgroups of interest, of which the effects were larger at 1 year compared to 6 months. Based on the disease progression model smoking status and oxygen use at baseline may affect the treatment effect size. At week 52, the decreased decline in %p-FVC for current smokers and patients with oxygen use at baseline were 1.56 (90% CI [1.02, 1.99]) and 2.32 (90% CI [1.74, 2.86]), respectively. These prognostic factors may be used to enrich studies with patients who are more likely to respond to treatment, by demonstrating a lesser decline in lung function, and therefore provide the potential to allow for IPF studies with smaller study populations or shorter durations.
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.