ReviewArchives of medical science : AMS2024
Incremental long-term benefit of drug therapies for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in quality of life but not mortality: a network meta-analysis.
Review in Archives of medical science : AMS, 2024. 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.
- Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy (SITT) for COPD: An Italian expert opinion paper on improving clinical outcomes and equity of therapeutic access.Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine · 2026Article
- Beyond inhaled medications: precision medicine and biologic therapies targeting the IL-33/TSLP/type 2 axis in COPD.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The latest evidence revealed that dupilumab, an interleukin-4 (IL-4) and interleukin-13 (IL-13) blocker, significantly reduces the exacerbation risk in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The efficacy of dupilumab compared with conventional inhaled drugs remains incompletely determined. This study aimed to investigate the comparative efficacy of dupilumab and conventional inhaled drugs in patients with stable COPD. Material and methods: This study retrieved randomised clinical trials (RCTs) with follow-up ≥ 48 weeks on long-acting β-agonists (LABAs), long-acting muscarinic receptor antagonists (LAMAs), inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs), and dupilumab in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. The information on eligible studies was extracted after the screening. The comparative efficacy of 4 drugs and their combinations in acute exacerbation and mortality was assessed using Bayesian network meta-analysis models. Results: This network meta-analysis identified 69 eligible RCTs on 7 classes of drug therapies after stepwise screening and included 125,331 COPD patients. Compared with placebo, the 7 drug interventions significantly reduced the risk of acute exacerbation, and the reduction degree increased with the incremental use of drug classes. ICS/LABA/LAMA/dupilumab was the most effective in decreasing exacerbation risk (OR = 0.561 [95% CI: 0.387-0.810]), followed by ICS/LABA/LAMA (OR = 0.717 [95% CI: 0.626-0.817]). The 7 drug therapies were not significantly associated with a lower risk of death compared to placebo. Nevertheless, ICS/LABA/LAMA/dupilumab is the most likely to be effective in decreasing mortality. Conclusions: The incremental use of combinations of conventional and novel drugs contributed to the long-term benefits in acute exacerbation but not death in COPD. The optimal drug combination in terms of acute COPD exacerbation was ICS/LABA/LAMA/dupilumab.
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.