ArticleTherapeutic advances in chronic disease2022
Therapeutic decisions in a cohort of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a multicenter, prospective survey from Poland.
Article in Therapeutic advances in chronic disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world treatment persistence and predictive factors for discontinuation of antifibrotic therapies in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: aFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Patient Profile-Based Management with Nintedanib in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis.Pulmonary therapy · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pirfenidone and nintedanib are considered as the standard of care in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), but there is no consensus as to which of these two agents should be regarded as first-line treatment. Objective: To provide real-world data on therapeutic decisions of pulmonary specialists, particularly the choice of the antifibrotic drug in patients with IPF. Methods: This was a multicenter, prospective survey collecting clinical data of patients with IPF considered as candidates for antifibrotic treatment between September 2019 and December 2020. Clinical characteristics and information on the therapeutic approach were retrieved. Statistical evaluation included multiple logistic regression analysis with stepwise model selection. Results: Data on 188 patients [74.5% male, median age 73 (interquartile range, 68-78) years] considered for antifibrotic therapy were collected. Treatment was initiated in 138 patients, while 50 patients did not receive an antifibrotic, mainly due to the lack of consent for treatment and IPF severity. Seventy-two patients received pirfenidone and 66 received nintedanib. Dosing protocol ( Conclusion: This real-world prospective study showed that dose protocol and patient preference were more frequently associated with the choice of nintedanib, while the comorbidity profile and concomitant medication use were more frequently associated with the choice of pirfenidone. Age, TL
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.