Trial reportInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2023
Can Treatable Traits Be the Approach to Addressing the Complexity and Heterogeneity of COPD?
Trial report in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stage-Dependent Reorganization of Inflammatory Biomarker Networks During Acute Exacerbations of COPD.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Regenerative therapeutics for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Pharmacological reviews · 2026Review
- A translational view of airway epithelial dysfunction in COPD.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Review
- Toward precision medicine in COPD: phenotypes, endotypes, biomarkers, and treatable traits.Respiratory research · 2025Review
- Review
- Personalizing Self-Management Interventions in COPD - Looking Beyond One-Size-Fits-All.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025Article
- Phenotype to Treatable Traits-Based Management in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Cureus · 2024Review
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
The complexity of COPD implies the need to identify groups of patients with similar clinical characteristics and prognosis or treatment requirements. This is why much attention has been paid to identifying the different clinical phenotypes by investigating the clinical expression of the disease, and endotypes by studying the biological networks that enable and limit reactions. However, this approach is complicated because one endotype gives rise to one or more clinical characteristics, and clinical phenotypes can be derived from several endotypes. To simplify the approach, a new taxonomic classification of COPD based on the different causes (or etiotypes) has been proposed, but these etiotypes have not yet been validated. A simpler method is the so-called tractable traits approach, which is free from any designation of the disorder to be treated and does not present the criticality of using etiotypes. A large randomised controlled trial on using the treatable traits approach in COPD is still lacking. Nevertheless, this approach is already applied by following the GOLD strategy. However, its application is complicated because several potentially treatable traits have been identified within the pulmonary domain, the extrapulmonary domain, and the behavioural/risk factor domain. In addition, the hierarchy of the dominant treatable traits has not yet been established, and they change over time both spontaneously and because of treatment. This means that the patients being treated according to the tractable traits approach must be constantly followed over time so that the therapy is focused on their temporal needs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.