Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33814904›Full record

Observational studyInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Withdrawal of Inhaled Corticosteroids in Patients with COPD - A Prospective Observational Study.

Anne Orholm Nielsen, Ole Hilberg, Jens Ulrik Stæhr Jensen, Steffen Helmer Kristensen, Jannie Christina Frølund, Pernille Kølholt Langkilde, Anders Løkke

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
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 5 institutions in 1 country.

Anne Orholm NielsenDepartment of Medicine, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde, Denmark.
Ole HilbergDepartment of Medicine, Hospital Little Belt, Vejle, Denmark.
Jens Ulrik Stæhr JensenDepartment of Internal Medicine, Respiratory Medicine Section, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, University Hospital of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-4036-0521
Steffen Helmer KristensenDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-3171-6717
Jannie Christina FrølundDepartment of Medicine, Hospital Little Belt, Vejle, Denmark.
Pernille Kølholt LangkildeDepartment of Medicine, Hospital Little Belt, Kolding, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8277-6299
Anders LøkkeDepartment of Medicine, Hospital Little Belt, Vejle, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-6905-4141
University of Southern Denmark · DKAalborg University Hospital · DKGentofte Hospital · DKKolding Hospital · DKZealand University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInhaled corticosteroids (ICS) are widely used in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but recent studies have raised doubts whether all COPD patients will benefit from ICS. This study evaluates in a real-life setting the effects of ICS withdrawal in patients with COPD.

methodsThe study was a prospective intervention study following patients with COPD for 6 months after abrupt withdrawal of ICS. FEV1 (L), blood eosinophilic count (x10E9/L) and number of exacerbations were measured at baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months after ICS withdrawal.

resultsNinety-six patients (56 females (57.4%), mean age 70 years (51-94 years)) with COPD were included in the study. Eleven patients were excluded during the study period (7 patients died, 4 patients withdrew their consent during the study period). During the 6 months, 51 patients (60%) had resumed treatment with ICS, of whom 34 patients (68%) experienced an exacerbation during follow-up. No significant decline in FEV1 was seen in this group between baseline and after 6 months (ΔFEV1 0.07 L, p = 0.09). In the remaining 34 patients (40%) without ICS after 6 months of follow-up, 15 patients (44.1%) experienced an exacerbation. No significant decline was seen in FEV1 at baseline and after 6 months (ΔFEV1 0.04 L, p = 0.28). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in age (70.5 vs 69.6 years, p = 0.53), nor between FEV1 at baseline (0.96 L vs 1.00 L, p = 0.63) or eosinophilic count (0.25 x10E9/L vs 0.17 x10E9/L, p = 0.07).

conclusionAbrupt withdrawal of ICS was possible in some patients. However, more than half of the patients resumed ICS during follow-up. Based on results from our study we were not able to foresee - from neither history of exacerbations nor eosinophilic count - whom will be able to manage without ICS and who will resume treatment with ICS.

Indexed as

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAdministration, InhalationAdrenal Cortex HormonesAgedBronchodilator AgentsEosinophilsFemaleHumansProspective StudiesAdrenal Cortex HormonesBronchodilator AgentsCOPDinhaled corticosteroidsreal-life settingwithdrawal

Identifiers

PMID33814904
PMCPMC8009342
OpenAlexW3136132517

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.