ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Single-versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy in patients with COPD in Spain: a retrospective cohort study comparing adherence, persistence, risk of exacerbations and economic outcomes.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world evaluation of adherence to single-inhaler triple therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the LIFE Study.Respiratory research · 2026Article
- Real-World Outcomes in Patients with COPD Initiating Budesonide/Glycopyrronium/Formoterol Fumarate Dihydrate After Dual and Triple Therapy in Spain: A Sub-Study of the ORESTES Study.Pulmonary therapy · 2026Article
- 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
- Determinants and Phenotypes of Poorly Controlled COPD Using the RADAR Score: A Cohort in Real-World Primary Care.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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
This retrospective study aimed to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of single-inhaler triple therapy (SITT) versus multiple-inhaler triple therapy (MITT) in a large cohort of COPD patients. Metrics on adherence, prevalence, and incidence of exacerbations in COPD patients treated with SITT or MITT were analyzed using pharmacy claims data integrated with the Spanish public health database. At the 12-month follow-up, patients in the SITT cohort were significantly more adherent (75.22% vs 70.1%; OR = 1.33), more persistent (64.32% vs 52.4%; HR = 1.56) and had a lower incidence of moderate exacerbations (53.53% vs 64.07%; OR = 0.65) than patients in the MITT cohort. The main predictors associated with lack of persistence were being a naïve patient (HR = 0.55) and moderate exacerbations (HR = 0.85). Furthermore, medication costs were lower for SITT (EUR 909.31 vs EUR 1025.31), demonstrating its cost-effectiveness. Our results suggest that SITT not only may improve adherence and persistence but also contributes to a relevant reduction in the risk of moderate exacerbations. Additionally, SITT offers a more cost-effective alternative for patients with moderate to severe COPD with documented exacerbations, making it a valuable strategy in real-world clinical practice.
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.