Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33947414›Full record

Observational studyRespiratory research2021

Comparative outcomes in patients receiving pirfenidone or nintedanib for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

Manon Belhassen, Faustine Dalon, Maëva Nolin, Eric Van Ganse

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Respiratory research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Survival impact and safety comparison of pirfenidone and nintedanib for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: A meta-analysis.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Multidisciplinary teams in the clinical care of fibrotic interstitial lung disease: current perspectives.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2022
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

Manon BelhassenPELyon, PharmacoEpidemiology Lyon, 210 avenue Jean Jaurès, 69007, Lyon, France.
Faustine DalonPELyon, PharmacoEpidemiology Lyon, 210 avenue Jean Jaurès, 69007, Lyon, France.
Maëva NolinPELyon, PharmacoEpidemiology Lyon, 210 avenue Jean Jaurès, 69007, Lyon, France.
Eric Van GansePELyon, PharmacoEpidemiology Lyon, 210 avenue Jean Jaurès, 69007, Lyon, France. eric.van-ganse@chu-lyon.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7463-9187

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundReal-world data regarding outcomes of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) are scarce, outside of registries. In France, pirfenidone and nintedanib are only reimbursed for documented IPF, with similar reimbursement criteria with respect to disease characteristics, prescription through a dedicated form, and IPF diagnosis established in multidisciplinary discussion. RESEARCH QUESTION: The data of the comprehensive French National Health System were used to evaluate outcomes in patients newly treated with pirfenidone or nintedanib in 2015-2016. STUDY DESIGN AND

methodsPatients aged < 50 years or who had pulmonary fibrosis secondary to an identified cause were excluded. All-cause mortality, acute respiratory-related hospitalisations and treatment discontinuations up to 31 December 2017 were compared using a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for age, sex, year of treatment initiation, time to treatment initiation and proxies of disease severity identified during a pre-treatment period.

resultsDuring the study period, a treatment with pirfenidone or nintedanib was newly initiated in 804 and 509 patients, respectively. No difference was found between groups for age, sex, time to treatment initiation, Charlson comorbidity score, and number of hospitalisations or medical contacts prior to treatment initiation. As compared to pirfenidone, nintedanib was associated with a greater risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-2.6), a greater risk of acute respiratory-related hospitalisations (HR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.7) and a lower risk of treatment discontinuation at 12 months (HR 0.7; 95% CI 0.6-0.9).

interpretationThis observational study identified potential differences in outcome under newly prescribed antifibrotic drugs, deserving further explorations.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overDatabases, FactualDisease ProgressionFemaleFranceHealth StatusHospitalizationHumansIdiopathic Pulmonary FibrosisIndolesMaleMiddle AgedPyridonesRespiratory System AgentsRisk AssessmentIndolesnintedanibpirfenidonePyridonesRespiratory System AgentsAcute hospitalisationsAntifibroticsIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosisMortality

Identifiers

PMID33947414
PMCPMC8094468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.