Cited 0 times in Scipus Cited Count

Comparison of clinical efficacy and safety between indacaterol and tiotropium in COPD: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorKim, JS-
dc.contributor.authorPark, J-
dc.contributor.authorLim, SY-
dc.contributor.authorOh, YM-
dc.contributor.authorYoo, KH-
dc.contributor.authorPark, YB-
dc.contributor.authorSheen, SS-
dc.contributor.authorKim, MJ-
dc.contributor.authorCarriere, KC-
dc.contributor.authorJung, JY-
dc.contributor.authorPark, HY-
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-14T05:02:33Z-
dc.date.available2017-06-14T05:02:33Z-
dc.date.issued2015-
dc.identifier.urihttp://repository.ajou.ac.kr/handle/201003/14167-
dc.description.abstractTwo once-daily inhaled bronchodilators, indacaterol and tiotropium, are widely used as first-line therapy in stable COPD patients. This study was performed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety between indacaterol and tiotropium in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcome was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) at week 12. Four RCTs were eligible for inclusion (three RCTs with moderate-to-severe COPD patients and one RCT with only severe COPD patients). Trough FEV₁ at weeks 12 and 26 were not significantly different between indacaterol and tiotropium by the standardized mean difference with 0.014 (95% CI, -0.036, 0.063, I²= 23.5%) and with 0.037 (95% CI, -0.059 to 0.133, I²= 0%) along with differences in means of 0.003L and 0.014L, respectively. Indacaterol and tiotropium also showed similar St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total scores and percentages of patients with SGRQ improvement (≥ 4 units) at week 26. The incidences of nasopharyngitis, serious cardiovascular events, and serious adverse events were not different between indacaterol and tiotropium, while those of cough (OR = 1.68, P < 0.001, and RR = 1.63) and COPD worsening (OR = 1.18, P = 0.003, and RR = 1.12) were higher for indacaterol than tiotropium. However, when one study with only severe COPD patients was removed from the meta-analysis, the difference in the incidence of COPD worsening between indacaterol and tiotropium became non-significant (OR = 1.13, P = 0.204, and RR = 1.09). The clinical efficacy and serious adverse events between indacaterol and tiotropium were equivocal in patients with moderate-to-severe COPD. Cough is a common complaint associated with indacaterol, and COPD worsening needs to be carefully monitored in severe COPD patients when treated with indacaterol.-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.subject.MESHAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists-
dc.subject.MESHBronchodilator Agents-
dc.subject.MESHForced Expiratory Volume-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHIndans-
dc.subject.MESHPulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive-
dc.subject.MESHQuinolones-
dc.subject.MESHRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic-
dc.subject.MESHTiotropium Bromide-
dc.subject.MESHTreatment Outcome-
dc.titleComparison of clinical efficacy and safety between indacaterol and tiotropium in COPD: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.pmid25799171-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4370711/-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor신, 승수-
dc.type.localJournal Papers-
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0119948-
dc.citation.titlePloS one-
dc.citation.volume10-
dc.citation.number3-
dc.citation.date2015-
dc.citation.startPagee0119948-
dc.citation.endPagee0119948-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationPloS one, 10(3). : e0119948-e0119948, 2015-
dc.identifier.eissn1932-6203-
dc.relation.journalidJ019326203-
Appears in Collections:
Journal Papers > School of Medicine / Graduate School of Medicine > Pulmonary & Critical Care Medicine
Files in This Item:
25799171.pdfDownload

qrcode

해당 아이템을 이메일로 공유하기 원하시면 인증을 거치시기 바랍니다.

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse