Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34711232›Full record

Trial reportRespiratory research2021

Efficacy of umeclidinium/vilanterol according to the degree of reversibility of airflow limitation at screening: a post hoc analysis of the EMAX trial.

Claus F Vogelmeier, Paul W Jones, Edward M Kerwin, Isabelle H Boucot, François Maltais, Lee Tombs, Chris Compton, David A Lipson, Leif H Bjermer

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Respiratory research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Claus F VogelmeierDepartment of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University Medical Centre Giessen and Marburg, Philipps-Universität Marburg, German Centre for Lung Research (DZL), Baldingerstraße, 35043, Marburg, Germany. claus.vogelmeier@med.uni-marburg.de.
Paul W JonesGSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK.
Edward M KerwinAltitude Clinical Consulting and Clinical Research Institute of Southern Oregon, Medford, OR, USA.
Isabelle H BoucotGSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK.
François MaltaisCentre de Pneumologie, Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Lee TombsPrecise Approach Ltd, GSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK.
Chris ComptonGSK, Brentford, Middlesex, UK.
David A LipsonRespiratory Clinical Sciences, GSK, Collegeville, PA, USA.
Leif H BjermerRespiratory Medicine and Allergology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Clinical Research Consulting · USLund University · SEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEUniversité Laval · CAUniversity of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

GSK 201749 [NCT03034915]
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the relationship between short-term bronchodilator reversibility and longer-term response to bronchodilators is unclear. Here, we investigated whether the efficacy of long-acting bronchodilators is associated with reversibility of airflow limitation in patients with COPD with a low exacerbation risk not receiving inhaled corticosteroids.

methodsThe double-blind, double-dummy EMAX trial randomised patients to umeclidinium/vilanterol 62.5/25 µg once daily, umeclidinium 62.5 µg once daily, or salmeterol 50 µg twice daily. Bronchodilator reversibility to salbutamol was measured once at screening and defined as an increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV

resultsThe mean (standard deviation) reversibility was 130 mL (156) and the median was 113 mL; 625/2425 (26%) patients were reversible. There was a trend towards greater improvements in trough FEV

conclusionsFP analyses suggest that patients with higher levels of reversibility have greater improvements in lung function and symptoms in response to bronchodilators. Improvements in lung function and rescue medication use were greater with umeclidinium/vilanterol versus monotherapy across the full range of reversibility, suggesting that the dual bronchodilator umeclidinium/vilanterol may be an appropriate treatment for patients with symptomatic COPD, regardless of their level of reversibility.

Indexed as

Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsAgedBenzyl AlcoholsBronchodilator AgentsChlorobenzenesDouble-Blind MethodDrug CombinationsFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansLungMaleMiddle AgedMuscarinic AntagonistsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveQuinuclidinesAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsBenzyl AlcoholsBronchodilator AgentsChlorobenzenesDrug CombinationsGSK573719Muscarinic AntagonistsQuinuclidinesvilanterolBronchodilator reversibilityCOPDDual bronchodilatorsE-RSLung functionRescue medicationSAC-TDIUmeclidinium/vilanterol

Identifiers

PMID34711232
PMCPMC8555352
OpenAlexW3211142445

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.