Trial reportThe Korean journal of internal medicine2022
The efficacy and safety of DW1601 in patients with acute bronchitis: a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, phase III clinical trial.
Trial report in The Korean journal of internal medicine, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Review of the Properties of Clinically Evaluated Plant-Derived Agents in the Treatment of Respiratory Infections.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Unlocking the therapeutic potential ofHeliyon · 2024Article
- Effect ofCaspian journal of internal medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsDW1601, an oral fixed dose combination syrup composed of DW16011 and Pelargonium sidoides, was developed to enhance the symptom relief effect in patients with acute bronchitis. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of DW1601 compared to DW16011 or P. sidoides for treatment of acute bronchitis using a randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled, multi-centre trial design.
methodsA total of 204 patients with acute bronchitis was randomized 1:1:1 to receive DW1601 (n = 67), DW16011 (n = 70), or P. sidoides (n = 64) for 7 days. The primary outcome was efficacy of DW1601 compared to DW16011 or P. sidoides in reducing the total bronchitis severity score (BSS) at day 4 of treatment. Secondary endpoints were changes in total and symptomspecific BSS, response rate and patient satisfaction rate. Safety analysis was assessed at day 7.
resultsAt 4 days after medication, decrease of total BSS from baseline was significantly greater in the DW1601 group than in the DW16011 group (-3.51 ± 0.18 vs. -2.65 ± 0.18, p = 0.001) or P. sidoides group (-3.56 ± 0.18 vs. -2.64 ± 0.19, p < 0.001). In addition, the BSS total score at day 7 and the BSS cough and sputum component scores at days 4 and 7 were significantly more improved with DW1601 treatment compared with the DW16011 group or P. sidoides group. Participants treated with DW1601 showed higher rates of response and satisfaction than control groups (response rate, DW1601, 100% vs. DW16011, 85.7% vs. P. sidoides, 85.9%; satisfaction rate, DW1601, 92.6% vs. DW16011, 82.9% vs. P. sidoides, 81.2%). Significant adverse events were not observed in the DW1601 group.
conclusionDW1601 is superior to DW16011 or P. sidoides in improving symptoms of acute bronchitis.
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.