ReviewCureus2022
Efficacy and Safety of Fevipiprant in Asthma: A Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of Obesity and Severe Asthma in Adults.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Review
- Modulating ILC2 function for treatment of type 2 airway diseases.Current trends in immunology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fevipiprant is a non-steroidal oral prostaglandin D2 (PGD2) receptor 2 antagonist that reduces bronchial wall inflammation, possibly improving clinical outcomes in the asthmatic population. A systemic review search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, and Central Cochrane Registry. Randomized clinical trials were included with Fevipiprant as an intervention arm compared to placebo. For continuous variables, the standardized mean difference, and for discrete variables, Mantel-Haenszel Risk Ratio (MH Risk ratio) was used for analysis. Confidence interval of 95% and p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. The analysis was done using a random-effects model irrespective of heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic. A total of five articles, including seven trials, were included in the analysis. There was significant increase in post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 0.249 (0.157-0.341), p<0.001 and pre-bronchodilator FEV1 0.115 (0.043 to 0.188), p=0.002. A decrease in asthma control questionnaire (ACQ) score of -0.124 (-0.187 to -0.062), p<0.001, was reported. Statistically significant asthma exacerbation reduction was reported in the high eosinophil count population with a daily dose of 450mg 0.77 relative risks (RR) (0.61-0.97). There was a positive deviation toward Fevipiprant 450mg dose for asthma reduction in the overall population, but it was not statistically significant. Fevipiprant produced a slight statistically significant reduction in asthma exacerbations in the high eosinophil count population with favorable deviation in the overall population. It significantly increased pre-and post-bronchodilator FEV1 and improved ACQ scores in treated patients. The benefits, though statistically significant, failed to translate into clinical importance.
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.