Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37276335›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2023

Long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) plus long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) versus LABA plus inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) for stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Nobuhiko Fukuda, Nobuyuki Horita, Ayami Kaneko, Atsushi Goto, Takeshi Kaneko, Erika Ota, Kayleigh M Kew

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Paradigm Shift in the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Improves Patient Outcomes.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025
    Article
  10. Observational
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nobuhiko FukudaDepartment of Pulmonology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Nobuyuki HoritaDepartment of Pulmonology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Ayami KanekoDepartment of Pulmonology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Atsushi GotoMetabolic Epidemiology Section, Division of Epidemiology, Center for Public Health Sciences, National Cancer Center, Tokyo, Japan.
Takeshi KanekoDepartment of Pulmonology, Yokohama City University Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama, Japan.
Erika OtaGlobal Health Nursing, Graduate School of Nursing Science, St. Luke's International University, Tokyo, Japan.
Kayleigh M KewCochrane Central Executive, London, UK.
Yokohama City University · JPCochrane · GBSt. Luke's International University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong-acting beta-agonists (LABAs), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), and inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) are inhaled medications used to manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). When two classes of medications are required, a LAMA plus an ICS (LABA+ICS) were previously recommended within a single inhaler as the first-line treatment for managing stable COPD in people in high-risk categories. However, updated international guidance recommends a LAMA plus a LABA (LAMA+LABA). This systematic review is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2017.

objectivesTo compare the benefits and harms of LAMA+LABA versus LABA+ICS for treatment of people with stable COPD. SEARCH

methodsWe performed an electronic search of the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization Clinical Trials Search Portal, followed by handsearches. Two review authors screened the selected articles. The most recent search was run on 10 September 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel or cross-over randomised controlled trials of at least one month's duration, comparing LAMA+LABA and LABA+ICS for stable COPD. We included studies conducted in an outpatient setting and irrespective of blinding. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and evaluated risk of bias. We resolved any discrepancies through discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs), and continuous data as mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Review Manager 5. Primary outcomes were: participants with one or more exacerbations of COPD; serious adverse events; quality of life, as measured by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score change from baseline; and trough forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV AUTHORS'

conclusionsCombination LAMA+LABA therapy probably holds similar benefits to LABA+ICS for exacerbations and quality of life, as measured by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, for people with moderate to severe COPD, but offers a larger improvement in FEV

Indexed as

PneumoniaPulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveAdrenal Cortex HormonesAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscarinic AntagonistsQuality of LifeAdrenal Cortex HormonesAdrenergic beta-2 Receptor AgonistsMuscarinic Antagonists

Identifiers

PMID37276335
PMCPMC10241721
OpenAlexW4379508685

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.