ArticleBMJ open respiratory research2026
In vitro characterisation of fluticasone propionate and ciclesonide delivered with and without valved holding chambers using cascade impaction and an adult simulated breathing profile.
Article in BMJ open respiratory research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundValved holding chambers (VHCs) are not interchangeable. Because VHC design and formulation type influence aerosol behaviour, each VHC-drug combination should be evaluated to inform clinical use and device selection.
aimTo compare the aerodynamic particle size distribution (APSD) of two inhaled corticosteroids delivered from pressurised metered dose inhalers with and without commonly used VHCs under realistic, adult-representative breathing.
methodsWe assessed fluticasone propionate (FP, suspension) and ciclesonide (CIC, solution) using no VHC and three VHCs (AeroChamber, EasyChamber and OptiChamber Diamond). A Next Generation Impactor was connected to an anatomically representative adult throat model and a breathing simulator generating an adult-type inhalation profile.
resultsWithout a VHC, throat deposition was high. With any VHC, throat deposition fell to only a few per cent of the label claim for both FP and CIC. The 1-5 µm respirable fraction was approximately one-third of the label claim for both drugs, irrespective of VHC use, while CIC generated a larger submicron fraction than FP. Small statistically significant differences between VHCs were observed, but absolute differences in APSD and throat deposition were modest.
conclusionsIn adult-representative conditions, VHCs substantially reduce oropharyngeal deposition but do not influence fine-particle delivery. Differences between the tested VHCs were minor and unlikely to be clinically meaningful, whereas FP and CIC showed distinct APSD profiles consistent with formulation type. These findings support performance-based, drug-specific evaluation of VHCs and underscore the value of systematic in vitro testing to guide evidence-based spacer-drug selection and to reduce throat deposition in 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.