Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9878995›Full record

ReviewDrugs1998

Theophylline. A review of its potential steroid sparing effects in asthma.

A Markham, D Faulds

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Theophylline.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2010
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

2 authors.

A MarkhamAdis International Limited, Auckland, New Zealand. demail@adis.co.nz
D Faulds

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledTheophylline is generally considered to be a bronchodilatory drug. However, recent pharmacodynamic studies indicate that it has anti-inflammatory effects. It reduced eosinophil survival rates in vitro, and reduced eosinophil accumulation in bronchial tissue in patients with atopic asthma. Theophylline has also been shown to reduce T cell proliferation and accumulation. These changes were mirrored by improved pulmonary function in patients with asthma in studies that evaluated this parameter. Three randomised double-blind studies have evaluated the potential role of theophylline as an anti-inflammatory treatment in patients with asthma not controlled by low doses of inhaled corticosteroids. Patients were randomised to receive low dose theophylline (400 to 750 mg daily) plus low dose inhaled corticosteroids, or an increased dose of inhaled corticosteroids. Clinical pulmonary function improved to the same or a greater extent in patients who received low dose inhaled corticosteroids plus theophylline than in those treated with high dose inhaled corticosteroids plus placebo. Where reported, the dosages of theophylline used in these studies resulted in serum theophylline concentrations of approximately 9 to 10 mg/L. Approximate monthly costs were provided in one study: these were $60 (year and currency not specified) for theophylline plus budesonide 800 micrograms/day, compared with $100 for budesonide 1600 micrograms/day, and $155 for a regimen of budesonide 800 micrograms/day and salmeterol 100 micrograms/day.

conclusionsLow dose theophylline has been shown to reduce requirements for inhaled corticosteroid therapy in patients with asthma and may reduce overall treatment costs.

Indexed as

Adrenal Cortex HormonesAsthmaBiological AvailabilityBronchodilator AgentsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Therapy, CombinationEosinophilsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTheophyllineTissue DistributionAdrenal Cortex HormonesBronchodilator AgentsTheophylline

Identifiers

PMID9878995
OpenAlexW1985082225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.