Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40536286›Full record

SynthesisCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2026

A Combined Model-Based Meta-Analysis of Aggregated and Individual FEV1 Data From Randomized COPD Trials.

Liang Yang, Carolina Llanos-Paez, Shuying Yang, Claire Ambery, Alienor Berges, Maria C Kjellsson, Mats O Karlsson

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01053988 phase3completednot on this map

A 24-Week Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Fluticasone Furoate (FF)/GW642444 Inhalation Powder and the Individual Components Delivered Once Daily (AM) Via a Novel Dry Powder Inhaler Compared With Placebo in Subjects With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)

TypeinterventionalSponsorGlaxoSmithKlineRan2009 to 2011Enrolled1,031ConditionsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveArmsFF/GW642444 Inhalation Powder, FF Inhalation Powder, GW642444 Inhalation Powder, Placebo
NCT01054885 phase3completednot on this map

A 24-Week Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Fluticasone Furoate (FF)/GW642444 Inhalation Powder and the Individual Components Delivered Once Daily (AM) Via a Novel Dry Powder Inhaler Compared With Placebo in Subjects With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)

TypeinterventionalSponsorGlaxoSmithKlineRan2009 to 2011Enrolled1,226ConditionsPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveArmsFF Inhalation Powder, FF/GW642444 Inhalation Powder, GW642444 Inhalation Powder, Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
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

7 authors.

Liang YangDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9012-3669
Carolina Llanos-PaezDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Shuying YangClinical Pharmacology Modelling and Simulation, GSK, London, UK.
Claire AmberyClinical Pharmacology Modelling and Simulation, GSK, London, UK.
Alienor BergesClinical Pharmacology Modelling and Simulation, GSK, London, UK.
Maria C KjellssonDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3531-9452
Mats O KarlssonDepartment of Pharmacy, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1258-8297

Funding

GlaxoSmithKline
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Model-based meta-analysis allows integration of aggregated-level data (AD) from different clinical trials in one model to assess population efficacy/safety. However, AD is limited in individual-level information, while individual-patient-level data (IPD) are hard to obtain. Combined modeling may take advantage of both sources. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of poor health and death. This study established a combined ADIPD model of COPD clinical trials with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) as an endpoint and explored methods for estimating interstudy variability (ISV), interindividual variability (IIV), and aggregation bias. Stochastic simulation and estimations (SSE) showed the best method in NONMEM to estimate ISV/IIV: using $LEVEL with equal weight of studies; for the AD part, ISVs from the AD model were fixed, estimating IIV with separate ETAs for each arm; the IPD part shared the fixed ISV and estimated IIV. An approximated normal distribution was derived for lognormal IIV to avoid aggregation bias. Covariate correlations were different at aggregated and individual levels, but did not introduce aggregation bias according to SSE. A separate AD model (published) and IPD model were built, then combined to form the ADIPD model. The ADIPD model included FEV1 baseline, disease progression, placebo effect, and Emax/constant dose-responses for 23 compounds. Identified covariate relationships: higher age, female, higher disease severity, non-current smoker related to lower baseline; higher baseline related to faster disease progression and higher drug effects. Covariate coefficients were estimated more precisely in the ADIPD model than the AD model. ADIPD modeling allows more informed clinical trial simulations for study design. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01053988 and NCT01054885.

Indexed as

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAgedFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicaggregated dataaggregation biascombined modelingCOPDindividual‐patient data

Identifiers

PMID40536286
PMCPMC12896389

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.